Hi Krzysztof,

On Fri, 2022-07-15 at 09:57 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 14/07/2022 14:28, Tinghan Shen wrote:

quoted

The System Control Processor System (SCPSYS) has several power
management related tasks in the system. Add the bindings for it.

Signed-off-by: Tinghan Shen <redacted>
---
 .../bindings/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml         | 62 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml

b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..a8b9220f2f27

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: 

https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/mediatek,scpsys.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!1TUl-dhD0p8qh3rYVk8RtfoKEP88jg8OADMd19qP6siBCQHhFnHWCgsyUqiETyBzxw8$
 
+$schema: 
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml*__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!1TUl-dhD0p8qh3rYVk8RtfoKEP88jg8OADMd19qP6siBCQHhFnHWCgsyUqiEJQmakAI$
 
+
+title: MediaTek System Control Processor System
+
+maintainers:
+  - MandyJH Liu [off-list ref]
+
+description:
+  MediaTek System Control Processor System (SCPSYS) has several
+  power management tasks. The tasks include MTCMOS power
+  domain control, thermal measurement, DVFS, etc.
+
+properties:
+  compatible:
+    items:
+      - const: mediatek,scpsys
+      - const: syscon
+      - const: simple-mfd
+
+  reg:
+    maxItems: 1
+
+  power-controller:
+    $ref: /schemas/power/mediatek,power-controller.yaml#
+
+required:
+  - compatible
+  - reg
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  - |
+    #include <dt-bindings/clock/mt8195-clk.h>
+    #include <dt-bindings/power/mt8195-power.h>
+
+    syscon@10006000 {
+        compatible = "mediatek,scpsys", "syscon", "simple-mfd";

This should be a SoC-specific compatible (and filename).

Ok. I think that you mean "mediatek,mt8195-scpsys".
I'll update it in next version.

quoted

+        reg = <0x10006000 0x100>;
+
+        spm: power-controller {

I think you created before less-portable, quite constrained bindings for
power controller. You now require that mt8195-power-controller is always
a child of some parent device which will share its regmap/MMIO with it.

And what if in your next block there is no scpsys block and power
controller is the scpsys alone? It's not possible with your bindings.

Do you mean a power controller node that looks like this?

scpsys: power-controller@10006000 {
	compatible = "mediatek,mt6797-scpsys";
	#power-domain-cells = <1>;

	// ...
};

Wouldn't it be better to assign some address space to the
power-controller (now as an offset from scpsys)?

Is this mean adding an offset after the node name?

spm: power-controller@0 {
                     ^^

This is just wondering (Rockchip did the same...) and not a blocker as
power-controller bindings are done.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Thanks,
TingHan



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