> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: mfd: Document RZ/G2L MTU3a > bindings > > On 11/10/2022 10:55, Biju Das wrote: > > > >>> .../bindings/mfd/renesas,rz-mtu3.yaml | 305 > >> ++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 305 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 > >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/renesas,rz-mtu3.yaml > >> > >> This should not be in MFD. Just because some device has few > features, > >> does not mean it should go to MFD... Choose either timer or pwm. > > > > MFD is for multifunction device. This IP supports multiple functions > > like timer, pwm, clock source/events. That is the reason I have > added > > here. MFD is core which provides register access for client devices. > > > > For me moving it to pwm or counter is not a big problem. > > Why do you think it cannot be MFD? > > > Because it makes MFD a dump for everything where author did not want > to think about real device aspects, but instead represented driver > design (MFD driver). Core driver is MFD, just provides resources to child devices and is not aware of any real device aspects. > > MFDs are pretty often combining unrelated features, e.g. PMICs which > have wakeup and system power control, regulator, 32 kHz clocks, RTC > and some USB connector. Here also same right? pwm, counter and clock are 3 unrelated features. That is the reason we have separate subsystems for these features. > > Just because you will have clocksource driver, PWM driver and timer > driver does not make it a MFD. MFD is multi function device. So are are you agreeing Clock source, PWM and timer are different functionalities or not? If not, why do we have 3 subsystems, if it is same? Where do keep these bindings as there is only single "rz_mtu" bindings for these 3 different functionalities? pwm or counter or mfd? Please let me know. Cheers, Biju
