Hi Krzysztof,

After discussing your message with our power team, 
we realized that we need your help to ensure we fully understand you.

On Mon, 2022-07-04 at 14:38 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 04/07/2022 12:00, Tinghan Shen wrote:

quoted

Add power domains controller node for mt8195.

Signed-off-by: Weiyi Lu <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <redacted>
---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8195.dtsi | 327 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 327 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8195.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8195.dtsi
index 8d59a7da3271..d52e140d9271 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8195.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8195.dtsi

@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
 #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/phy/phy.h>
 #include <dt-bindings/pinctrl/mt8195-pinfunc.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/power/mt8195-power.h>
 
 / {
 	compatible = "mediatek,mt8195";

@@ -338,6 +339,332 @@
 			#interrupt-cells = <2>;
 		};
 
+		scpsys: syscon@10006000 {
+			compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd";

These compatibles cannot be alone.

the scpsys sub node has the compatible of the power domain driver.
do you suggest that the compatible in the sub node should move to here?

quoted

+			reg = <0 0x10006000 0 0x1000>;
+			#power-domain-cells = <1>;

If it is simple MFD, then probably it is not a power domain provider.
Decide.

this MFD device is the power controller on mt8195. Some features need 
to do some operations on registers in this node. We think that implement 
the operation of these registers as the MFD device can provide flexibility 
for future use. We want to clarify if you're saying that an MFD device 
cannot be a power domain provider.



Best regards,
TingHan





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