Re: [PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: mediatek: Add acpi support

[Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>]

On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 08:06:51PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

[...]

> > I also assume/hope that we don't want to add a "reg-names" _DSD property either
> > in ACPI to deal with this seamlessly in DT/ACPI (that was done for
> > "interrupt-names"):
> > 
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/firmware-guide/acpi/enumeration.rst?h=v6.18-rc7#n188
> 
> Hmm... Why not?

What's the policy there ? Half of the ACPI bindings for an interrupt
descriptor are defined in the ACPI specs (ie _CRS) and the other half
(ie "interrupt-names") is documented in the Linux kernel (or are we
documenting this elsewhere ?) ?

Or we are saying that "interrupt-names" properties are added by kernel
code _only_ (through software nodes, to make parsing seamless between DT
and ACPI) based on hardcoded name values in drivers ?

I don't think I can grok any example of the latter in the mainline.

I am asking because I'd need to add something similar shortly to make parsing
of platform devices created out of ACPI static tables easier (I guess we
can postpone discussion till I post the code but I thought I'd ask).

Are we going to do the same for "reg-names" ?

Most importantly, what is DT maintainers stance on the matter ?

Thanks,
Lorenzo

> > I am sorry I have got more questions than answers here - it would be good
> > to understand where the line is drawn when it comes to OF/ACPI and fwnode
> > heuristics compatibility.
> 
> -- 
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
> 
>