From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.153.233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7FCCF190662; Thu, 12 Sep 2024 12:13:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.153.233 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726143209; cv=none; b=bm751R5mMNdOhsmpbtveO1XKza/N0iaqwNBiqZEWETg5PDiVOprkkrP31lzGGG/9kyfGLtsfrOogS0Z22Kuxxo0MIZbYgJw/7bMFKg42kRsTnWDkgEIuNrkkt1oRitklhaRKcVPPUFQrpQ/RI0SatC3D99AjPh1wWMqtIV/CsDM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726143209; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cEY1AOlL91/61eGcJH2ELkDPPzV3GkUqoGzJ0Pd46k8=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oxwaVqK0um+gvyklv9iVgCiPxOshwVgISNI+cp/1UtQdZPP7lmM1niYA6CcWJgEli+x0Kjzp6LqU1wM3G7+EdZcdJdbTbw3ZKDMXjifl84H1uOO1jWMMEFkdefhrIhZp5OmvS6b1zBoMQNXVD9iembUIqDarvhWZcWVA0tPuHxM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=microchip.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=microchip.com header.i=@microchip.com header.b=MZkojX1F; arc=none smtp.client-ip=68.232.153.233 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=microchip.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=microchip.com header.i=@microchip.com header.b="MZkojX1F" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1726143208; x=1757679208; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=cEY1AOlL91/61eGcJH2ELkDPPzV3GkUqoGzJ0Pd46k8=; b=MZkojX1FVGekpnNSDTtL1J7gAGbgz804RtSZ5M5cAXc3ymLQ6kNu/Xok 80f+NkSKgkoZlh9FUEB6DwJGpqTelr0vmKjymnUacWBRZWPgpbNYduqUo QrojMtt77pgxpmDvSDd2c04BvtAB0dBxLrPudhQD9EQS54tDGR61mIn0b BczqKkVrCsIWyVoxCoiIatyOJ5FJUlTr4sx/rP1mxLkaR++gJyeJMGDmN G9saeRDmsuX6VuTV1tmiBDXX5CPLvsbl/+Rm2Aem5kl7GGxT3eIdRy2j/ veIJjQQ1C4fDSTN7WYujwO9G/AkcTxb1ZgHEMDXG4jU4gTGf8a0EVs7Kr Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 18BxjTQpRoWaBWoUq6oHpQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: x9envEQaRfmwJpgwNfqwSA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,223,1719903600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="262683165" X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa5.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256; 12 Sep 2024 05:13:25 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) by chn-vm-ex01.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Thu, 12 Sep 2024 05:12:44 -0700 Received: from wendy (10.10.85.11) by chn-vm-ex02.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.144) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 12 Sep 2024 05:12:42 -0700 Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 13:12:09 +0100 From: Conor Dooley To: Ciprian Marian Costea CC: Conor Dooley , Alexandre Belloni , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , , , , , NXP S32 Linux Team , Bogdan-Gabriel Roman , Ghennadi Procopciuc Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: rtc: add schema for NXP S32G2/S32G3 SoCs Message-ID: <20240912-trodden-lens-1dbf15786960@wendy> References: <20240911070028.127659-1-ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com> <20240911070028.127659-2-ciprianmarian.costea@oss.nxp.com> <20240911-caretaker-dropper-424e102f8634@spud> <2aa1d3ff-bc9b-4c1f-a6d7-5673981d0ed6@oss.nxp.com> <20240912-skedaddle-till-2fa6f44c6e66@wendy> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="T9fVS6fm1fe+YfoO" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: --T9fVS6fm1fe+YfoO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 03:00:20PM +0300, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote: > On 9/12/2024 2:13 PM, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 01:55:34PM +0300, Ciprian Marian Costea wrote: > > > On 9/11/2024 9:22 PM, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 10:00:25AM +0300, Ciprian Costea wrote: > > > > > From: Ciprian Marian Costea > > > > >=20 > > > > > This patch adds the dt-bindings for NXP S32G2/S32G3 SoCs RTC driv= er. > > > >=20 > > > > > +properties: > > > > > + compatible: > > > > > + const: nxp,s32g-rtc > > > >=20 > > > > Also, how come there are not specific compatibles for the two SoCs > > > > supported here? > > >=20 > > > The RTC module is the same for S32G2 and S32G3 SoCs. > > > Therefore, I did not wanted to add two compatible strings ('nxp,s32g2= -rtc' > > > and 'nxp,s32g3-rtc') when there is no actual difference which they co= uld > > > target. > >=20 > > Are these different fusings of the same silicon, or are they distinctly > > different SoCs that happen to share an IP block? > >=20 >=20 > S32G2 and S32G3 are different SoCs that share the RTC IP block. In that case, I'd expect there to be two compatibles, one for each SoC. One can then fall back to the other, so the driver only has to be aware of one compatible. Had they been different fusings of the same silicon, thus sharing the same integration etc, a generic compatible would have been fine. --T9fVS6fm1fe+YfoO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZuLamQAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0pKUAP98pWkcE6doOXtn3+eXgRMuCf3W2atGBYQjaD33w4oQ1AEApWry3Dc81DSh j2yu5s5TN5SXpWQAx1YS/GDpVTIlrgA= =ZOCH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --T9fVS6fm1fe+YfoO--