On Fri, 21 Dec 2018 at 11:45, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 4:58 PM Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > As pointed by Rob, CRU is a kind of block that can't be guaranteed to > > have everything exposed as subnodes. It's a set of various registers > > that aren't tied to any single device. It could be described much more > > accurately as MFD (Multi-Function Device). > > > > Some hardware blocks may indeed want to access a register or two of the > > CRU which requires describing it as the "syscon". > > > > While at it replace exmple node name with the standard "pinctrl" (also > > pointed out by Rob). > > > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Hi Linus, > > > > After being pinged about the pinctrl driver I realized I never addressed > > Rob's comments from the e-mail thread: > > > > [PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: bcm4708-pinmux: improve example binding > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg682838.html > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/984024/ > > > > Rob has pointed correctly (as always) that describing CRU using > > "simple-bus" has its implications and may hunt us back if we ever > > realize we will want to reference it as "syscon". That is pretty likely > > actually. > > > > To fix that while still possible (before having that Documentation in > > any stable release) I'd like you to consider taking this patch for the > > 4.20 release if you find it possible. > > > > I'm well aware it's damn late. I'm aware I've screwed up. I'm sorry. > > > > I'm afraid I cannot fix it anyhow. Just take a look at that patch and > > feel free to say I'm crazy coming with it so late. > > I just applied it. It's not like it's etched in stone though some > people may have that mental model. > > If the DT maintainers have further concerns we can patch it > again. > > Rough consensus and running code. Thank you, I appreciate it! -- Rafał
