On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 05:18:10PM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote: > > > On 2023/4/25 16:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 25/04/2023 09:57, Changhuang Liang wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 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. > > > > Unfortunately, I do not see the correlation between these, any > > connection. Why being a child of syscon block would mean that this > > should no be power domain controller? Really, why? These are two > > unrelated things. > > > > Best regards, > > Krzysztof > > > > Let me summarize what has been discussed above. > > There has two ways to describe this "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon"(0x17010000). > 1. (0x17010000) is power-controller node: > > aon_pwrc: power-controller@17010000 { > compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu", "syscon"; > reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>; > #power-domain-cells = <1>; > }; > > > 2. (0x17010000) is syscon node, power-controller is child-node of syscon: > > aon_syscon: syscon@17010000 { > compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon", "syscon", "simple-mfd"; > reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>; > > aon_pwrc: power-controller { > compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu"; > #power-domain-cells = <1>; > }; > }; I thought that Rob was suggesting something like this: aon_syscon: syscon@17010000 { compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon", ... reg = <0x0 0x17010000 0x0 0x1000>; #power-domain-cells = <1>; }; Cheers, Conor.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
