Quoting Sean Wang (2018-07-18 03:06:27)

On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 11:05 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:

quoted

Hi Sean,

On Wednesday, 18 July 2018 05:57:35 EEST Sean Wang wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 2018-07-18 at 00:03 +0200, matthias.bgg at kernel.org wrote:

quoted

From: Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@suse.com>

The MMSYS subsystem includes clocks and drm components.
This patch adds an initailization path through a platform device
for the clock part, so that both drivers get probed from the same
device tree compatible.

Sorry for that I should have a response earlier for the series.

Some points I felt they're not exactly right and should be fixed up
before we're moving on

Currently, drm driver have a wrong reference to the dt-binding,
"mediatek,mt2701-mmsys" or "mediatek,mt8173-mmsys", they should be all
for the subsystem exporting clock and reset line such common resource to
its sub-devices. Every subsystem has a similar shape. I hope mmsys
shouldn't be an exception.

DRM device needs to have its own dt-binding show how connections between
DRM components being made and its node should be put under mmsys node.

In this way, it becomes easy to see how the topology of the subsystem is
and grows, like a tree "device tree", instead of hiding the details in
the implementation.

The similar example we already did for audsys on mt2701 and mt7623 as
below

    audsys: clock-controller at 11220000 {
            

compatible = "mediatek,mt7623-audsys",

quoted

           "mediatek,mt2701-audsys",

quoted

           "syscon";

quoted

      ...

quoted

afe: audio-controller {

quoted

      compatible = "mediatek,mt7623-audio",

quoted

              
     "mediatek,mt2701-audio";

quoted

      ...

quoted

};

quoted

    };

This looks very strange to me. I'm not familiar with the hardware 
architecture, but a clock controller that includes an audio controller seems 
like a very weird design. It's usually the other way around, you have an audio

yes, naming audsys as clock controller is really not good. it should be
worth a better naming.

mtk subsystem AFAIK works as a container, at least provides clocks,
reset, syscon access, these common resource to these devices running on
the subsystem. It also has a power gate independent from other
subsystem, that can be controlled when these devices all powered down
or once up.

And it should be better that we don't assume what exact devices are
running on since it is possible that there're different devices running
on the same subsystem per SoC. mtk has many subsystem working in this
way. mmsys is just a case. we can see in [1]


[1]
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v4.18-rc5/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/mediatek
 

Sean, is this an ack for this patch series? I think the consensus is to
not modify DT to add a subnode for the "clk" part of the hardware, but
instead either register the clks from the device driver that has the clk
hardware inside of it, or do what this patch series does and register a
device in software from the "parent" device driver so that logically clk
things are contained in drivers/clk/