Re: [PATCH fixes 4.20] dt-bindings: pinctrl: bcm4708-pinmux: rework binding to use syscon

From: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc: "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	"Scott Branden" <sbranden@broadcom.com>,
	"Ray Jui" <rjui@broadcom.com>,
	"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
	"Rafał Miłecki" <rafal@milecki.pl>,
	"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH fixes 4.20] dt-bindings: pinctrl: bcm4708-pinmux: rework binding to use syscon
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 12:07:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACna6rx2P3ncP6ekksxGVZGBJ6YQtsOFkv6eK0BTxvMDRHZHxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdYoZtZci3BJ=-2AGr4vz7-OVJ9UwppYviMAiotBn2EU6Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 11:45, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:58 PM Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> >
> > As pointed by Rob, CRU is a kind of block that can't be guaranteed to
> > have everything exposed as subnodes. It's a set of various registers
> > that aren't tied to any single device. It could be described much more
> > accurately as MFD (Multi-Function Device).
> >
> > Some hardware blocks may indeed want to access a register or two of the
> > CRU which requires describing it as the "syscon".
> >
> > While at it replace exmple node name with the standard "pinctrl" (also
> > pointed out by Rob).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> > ---
> > Hi Linus,
> >
> > After being pinged about the pinctrl driver I realized I never addressed
> > Rob's comments from the e-mail thread:
> >
> > [PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: bcm4708-pinmux: improve example binding
> > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg682838.html
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/984024/
> >
> > Rob has pointed correctly (as always) that describing CRU using
> > "simple-bus" has its implications and may hunt us back if we ever
> > realize we will want to reference it as "syscon". That is pretty likely
> > actually.
> >
> > To fix that while still possible (before having that Documentation in
> > any stable release) I'd like you to consider taking this patch for the
> > 4.20 release if you find it possible.
> >
> > I'm well aware it's damn late. I'm aware I've screwed up. I'm sorry.
> >
> > I'm afraid I cannot fix it anyhow. Just take a look at that patch and
> > feel free to say I'm crazy coming with it so late.
>
> I just applied it. It's not like it's etched in stone though some
> people may have that mental model.
>
> If the DT maintainers have further concerns we can patch it
> again.
>
> Rough consensus and running code.

Thank you, I appreciate it!

-- 
Rafał

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel