>>>>>> >>>>>> 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-aon-pmu >>> >>> I was speaking to Rob about this over the weekend, he asked: >>> 'Why isn't "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon" just the power-domain provider >>> itself?' >> >> Maybe not, this syscon only offset "0x00" configure power switch. >> other offset configure other functions, maybe not power, so this >> "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon" not the power-domain itself. >> >>> Do we actually need to add a new binding for this at all? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Conor. >>> >> >> Maybe this patch do that. >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230414024157.53203-6-xingyu.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > This makes it a child-node right? I think Rob already said no to that in > and earlier revision of this series. What he meant the other day was > making the syscon itself a power domain controller, since the child node > has no meaningful properties (reg, interrupts etc). > > Cheers, > Conor. Yes, "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu" is a child-node of "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon". In my opinion, "0x17010000" is "aon-syscon" on JH7110 SoC, and this "aon-pmu" is just a part of "aon-syscon" function, so I think it is inappropriate to make "aon-syscon" to a power domain controller. I think using the child-node description is closer to JH7110 SoC.
