* Re: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: add optional reset
[not found] ` <b3a1b5ba-c381-407f-9118-aac7217138af@kernel.org>
@ 2026-05-11 7:10 ` Xuyang Dong
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Xuyang Dong @ 2026-05-11 7:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski
Cc: ukleinek, robh, krzk+dt, conor+dt, ben-linux, ben.dooks, p.zabel,
linux-pwm, devicetree, linux-kernel, ningyu, linmin, xuxiang,
wangguosheng, pinkesh.vaghela
>
> On 29/04/2026 11:30, Xuyang Dong wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +allOf:
> >>>>> + - $ref: pwm.yaml#
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + - if:
> >>>>> + properties:
> >>>>> + compatible:
> >>>>> + contains:
> >>>>> + const: eswin,eic7700-pwm
> >>>>
> >>>> Same problem as v3 which I commented. I do not understand why your new
> >>>> device has also 1 reset.
> >>>>
> >>>> Your commit msg MUST explain why 1 reset is valid.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Hi Krzysztof,
> >>>
> >>> Although the PWM IP supports two clock domains, each requiring a reset,
> >>> the EIC7700 implementation uses the same clock domain for both clock
> >>> signals. Therefore, the eic7700-pwm only supports one reset.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If we speak about eic7700, explain why it has two resets now, according
> >> to schema, even though you say it has not.
> >>
> >> But I was speaking about dw-apb-timers-pwm, which has one reset as well!
> >> Why you are not having proper constraints? Please read writing bindings
> >> document.
> >>
> >
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> >
> > Let me clarify the reset signals.
> > - snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2: IP spec has 2 optional reset signals (one per
> > clock domain), SoC vendor decides whether to wire them — so maxItems: 2,
> > optional in required.
>
> Two reset signals but what is exactly optional? Each of them? Only the
> first? Binding does not allow the first to be optional.
>
Hi Krzysztof,
Thank you for the review.
For the generic snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2 binding, both reset signals
are now fully optional by not including resets in the required list.
When a single optional reset signal is used, the interface bus reset
(index 0) is used by default.
Keep the YAML as follows:
+ resets:
+ minItems: 1
+ items:
+ - description: Interface bus reset
+ - description: PWM timer logic reset
Add the following description to the commit message:
Whether each signal is wired on a given SoC is a board integration
decision, so the resets property is optional for snps,dw-apb-timers-pwm2.
When present, up to two handles may be supplied: the bus reset is always
at index 0 and the timer reset at index 1.
> > - eswin,eic7700-pwm: SoC physically ties both signals to one reset — so
> > exactly 1, required.
>
> Then two would not be right and you need to restrict that.
>
For the specific eswin,eic7700-pwm binding, the reset signal is required
and fixed to one via conditional schema (if:then:), with maxItems: 1
and resets added to required. And add an example for eswin,eic7700-pwm.
The changes are as follows:
+allOf:
+ - $ref: pwm.yaml#
+
+ - if:
+ properties:
+ compatible:
+ contains:
+ const: eswin,eic7700-pwm
+ then:
+ properties:
+ resets:
+ maxItems: 1
+ required:
+ - resets
+
+ - |
+ pwm@50818000 {
+ compatible = "eswin,eic7700-pwm";
+ reg = <0x50818000 0x4000>;
+ #pwm-cells = <3>;
+ clocks = <&bus>, <&timer>;
+ clock-names = "bus", "timer";
+ resets = <&reset>;
+ };
Then change the binding's subject from "dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: add optional
reset" to "dt-bindings: pwm: dwc: add eswin,eic7700-pwm compatible and resets".
Do these changes look acceptable to you?
Best regards,
Xuyang Dong
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread