Re: [RESEND v2 1/6] dt-bindings: power: Add JH7110 AON PMU support

From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@starfivetech.com>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	Walker Chen <walker.chen@starfivetech.com>,
	Hal Feng <hal.feng@starfivetech.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, vkoul@kernel.org,
	linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND v2 1/6] dt-bindings: power: Add JH7110 AON PMU support
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 17:56:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230425-commotion-prewashed-876247bed4ab@spud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <663e9933-b9b3-a48f-98b6-2207215a8ed7@starfivetech.com>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2498 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 08:26:35PM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote:
> On 2023/4/25 17:35, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 05:18:10PM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote:
> >> On 2023/4/25 16:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 25/04/2023 09:57, Changhuang Liang wrote:
> >>>> Yes, "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu" is a child-node of "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon".
> >>>> In my opinion, "0x17010000" is "aon-syscon" on JH7110 SoC, and this "aon-pmu" is just 
> >>>> a part of "aon-syscon" function, so I think it is inappropriate to make "aon-syscon"
> >>>> to a power domain controller. I think using the child-node description is closer to
> >>>> JH7110 SoC. 
> >>>
> >>> Unfortunately, I do not see the correlation between these, any
> >>> connection. Why being a child of syscon block would mean that this
> >>> should no be power domain controller? Really, why? These are two
> >>> unrelated things.
> >>
> >> Let me summarize what has been discussed above. 
> >>
> >> There has two ways to describe this "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon"(0x17010000).
> >> 1. (0x17010000) is power-controller node:
> >>
> >> 	aon_pwrc: power-controller@17010000 {
> >> 		compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu", "syscon";
> >> 		reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>;
> >> 		#power-domain-cells = <1>;
> >> 	};
> >>
> >>
> >> 2. (0x17010000) is syscon node, power-controller is child-node of syscon:
> >>
> >> 	aon_syscon: syscon@17010000 {
> >> 		compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon", "syscon", "simple-mfd";
> >> 		reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>;
> >>
> >> 		aon_pwrc: power-controller {
> >> 			compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu";
> >> 			#power-domain-cells = <1>;
> >> 		};
> >> 	};
> > 
> > I thought that Rob was suggesting something like this:
> > 	aon_syscon: syscon@17010000 {
> > 		compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon", ...
> > 		reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>;
> > 		#power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > 	};

> I see the kernel:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8167.dtsi
> this file line 42:
> it's power-controller also has no meaningful properties.
> What do you think?

I'm not sure that I follow. It has a bunch of child-nodes does it not,
each of which is a domain?

I didn't see such domains in your dts patch, they're defined directly in
the driver instead AFAIU. Assuming I have understood that correctly,
your situation is different to that mediatek one?

Cheers,
Conor.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]

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