On 6/30/22 21:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
Hi,
[...]
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl.yaml
index b246d8386ba4a..05a19d3229830 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/imx/fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl.yaml
@@ -18,11 +18,18 @@ properties:
compatible:
items:
- const: fsl,imx8mp-media-blk-ctrl
+ - const: simple-mfd
Not really... simple-mfd means devices is really simple and you just use
it to instantiate children. However this is not simple - it's a power
domain controller with several clocks and power domains as input.
It's not a simple MFD, but a regular device.
I don't understand this comment. The LDB bridge is literally two
registers with a few bits in this media block controller register area.
Can you expand on why the simple-mfd is unsuitable and what should it be
instead ?
Looking at the bindings you have there 10 power domains, 10 input clocks
and a domain provider. The driver is also not that simple which is
another argument that this is not simple-mfd. Simply, it is not simple.
What I meant, is that probably you should populate children from the
driver instead of adding simple-mfd compatible. Once you add simple-mfd,
you cannot remove it and children cannot use anything from the parent.
No, I don't think so.
The block controller provides those 10 power domains, those are separate
things controlled by separate registers within the block control
register space.
This LDB bridge are two more completely unrelated registers which have
nothing to do with those power domains . They are just in the same
register block because they had to put those registers somewhere. And
they are mixed literally in the middle of the register block, because
there was space it seems. Hence the simple-mfd is I think the right
thing here.
