On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 01:29:57PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 12/04/2023 11:42, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:51:16PM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2023/4/12 16:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> On 11/04/2023 08:47, Changhuang Liang wrote: > >>>> When use "starfive,jh7110-pmu-dphy" compatible, do not need the reg and > >>>> interrupts properties. > >> [...] > >>>> > >>>> description: | > >>>> StarFive JH7110 SoC includes support for multiple power domains which can be > >>>> @@ -17,6 +18,7 @@ properties: > >>>> compatible: > >>>> enum: > >>>> - starfive,jh7110-pmu > >>>> + - starfive,jh7110-pmu-dphy > >>> > >>> You do here much more than commit msg says. > >>> > >>> Isn'y DPHY a phy? Why is it in power? > >>> > >> > >> OK, I will add more description. This is a power framework used to turn on/off > >> DPHY. So it in power, not a phy. > > > > Perhaps tie it less to its role w/ the phy, and more to do with its > > location, say "jh7110-aon-pmu"? > > There's already "aon"/"sys"/"stg" stuff used in clock-controller and > > syscon compatibles etc. > > > > Krzysztof, what do you think of that? (if you remember the whole > > discussion we previously had about using those identifiers a few weeks > > ago). > > Depends whether this is the same case or not. > AFAIR, for AON/SYS/STG > these were blocks with few features, not only clock controller. Correct, yes. In the dts, this "pmu-dphy" node is a child node of the aon syscon, so this pmu stuff would be one of the several features.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
