Hi Gary,

thanks for your patch!

Overall this is starting to look good.

Please make the bindings patch 1/3 because we usually put the bindings
first.

Some comments below!

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 8:06 AM Gary Yang [off-list ref] wrote:

The pin-controller is used to control the Soc pins.
There are two pin-controllers on Cix Sky1 platform.
One is used under S0 state, the other is used under
S5 state.

Signed-off-by: Gary Yang <redacted>

(...)

+# Client device subnode's properties
+patternProperties:
+  'pins$':
+    type: object
+    additionalProperties: false
+    patternProperties:
+      '(^pins|pins?$)':
+        type: object
+        additionalProperties: false
+        description:
+          A pinctrl node should contain at least one subnodes representing the
+          pinctrl groups available on the machine. Each subnode will list the
+          pins it needs, and how they should be configured, with regard to muxer
+          configuration, pullups, and drive strength.

I'm not sure the binding maintainers want this info here, if the same is inside
pincfg-node.yaml, I would just skip it.

+        $ref: /schemas/pinctrl/pincfg-node.yaml
+
+        properties:
+          pinmux:
+            description:
+              Integer array, represents gpio pin number and mux setting.
+              Supported pin number and mux varies for different SoCs, and are
+              defined as macros in arch/arm64/boot/dts/cix/sky1-pinfunc.h directly.

No reference to arch/arm64 in the bindings please. Just
drop this.

The bindings are used by U-Boot and FreeBSD as well so these
developers will be confused by any Linux-specific references.

+
+          bias-disable: true
+
+          bias-pull-up: true
+
+          bias-pull-down: true
+
+          drive-strength:
+            description:
+              Can support 15 levels, from DS_LEVEL1 to DS_LEVEL15.
+              See arch/arm64/boot/dts/cix/sky1-pinfunc.h for valid arguments.

Same thing.

+
+        required:
+          - pinmux
+
+additionalProperties: false
+
+examples:
+  # Pinmux controller node
+  - |
+    #define CIX_PAD_GPIO012_FUNC_GPIO012 (11 << 8 | 0x0)
+    #define DS_LEVEL4 (4)
+    iomuxc: pinctrl@4170000 {
+        compatible = "cix,sky1-iomuxc";
+        reg = <0x4170000 0x1000>;
+
+        wifi_vbat_gpio: wifi-vbat-gpio-pins {
+            pins-wifi-vbat-gpio {
+                pinmux = <CIX_PAD_GPIO012_FUNC_GPIO012>;
+                bias-pull-up;
+                drive-strength = <DS_LEVEL4>;
+           };
+        };
+    };

This looks good to me, I don't know if the bindings maintainers have
opinions on the placement of defines in examples.

Yours,
Linus Walleij