From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/16] dt-bindings: update the Allwinner GPADC device tree binding for H3 & A83T To: Maxime Ripard Cc: lee.jones@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, wens@csie.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net, davem@davemloft.net, hans.verkuil@cisco.com, mchehab@kernel.org, rask@formelder.dk, clabbe.montjoie@gmail.com, sean@mess.org, krzk@kernel.org, quentin.schulz@free-electrons.com, icenowy@aosc.io, edu.molinas@gmail.com, singhalsimran0@gmail.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com References: <20180128232919.12639-1-embed3d@gmail.com> <20180128232919.12639-2-embed3d@gmail.com> <20180129091937.w3c3btvva5yaqlf6@flea.lan> From: Philipp Rossak Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 13:30:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180129091937.w3c3btvva5yaqlf6@flea.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed List-ID: >> +Example for A33: >> ths: ths@1c25000 { >> compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-ths"; >> reg = <0x01c25000 0x100>; >> @@ -17,6 +40,27 @@ Example: >> #io-channel-cells = <0>; >> }; >> >> +Example for H3: >> + ths: thermal-sensor@1c25000 { >> + compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-h3-ths"; >> + reg = <0x01c25000 0x400>; >> + clocks = <&ccu CLK_BUS_THS>, <&ccu CLK_THS>; >> + clock-names = "bus", "mod"; >> + resets = <&ccu RST_BUS_THS>; >> + interrupts = ; >> + #thermal-sensor-cells = <0>; >> + #io-channel-cells = <0>; >> + }; >> + >> +Example for A83T: >> + ths: thermal-sensor@1f04000 { >> + compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a83t-ths"; >> + reg = <0x01f04000 0x100>; >> + interrupts = ; >> + #thermal-sensor-cells = <1>; >> + #io-channel-cells = <0>; >> + }; >> + > > I'm wondering if this is actually needed. We've used this convoluted > constructs to be compatible with the old driver, but I'm not sure this > is actually worth it now, and this is causing several issues, among > which: > - We need to have a bunch of quirks to handle all the DT cases. > - We need to have an MFD, which isn't really optimal > > So I'd rather introduce a new compatible for the old SoCs, keep the > old driver around, and simplify a lot that driver code that will ease > further developments. And we can also get rid of the MFD in the > process. I discussed it with Quentin, and he was ok with it, what do > you think? > > (and that would involve creating a new file for the bindings you > introduce here). > > Maxime > I think this is a good idea, and the desired way to rework the driver. To sum up what we talked on IRC: This will end up in removing the MFD driver and moving the interrupt handling into the iio driver. At the end this will also simplify the IRQ part. Philipp