On 2023/5/6 18:17, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Sat, May 06, 2023 at 09:45:07AM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote: >> >> >> On 2023/5/5 20:38, Conor Dooley wrote: >>> On Fri, May 05, 2023 at 09:29:15AM +0800, Changhuang Liang wrote: >>> >>>> But if keep this "starfive,jh7110-aon-syscon" compatible. Which .yaml match to >>>> it? Use this series dt-bindings or syscon series dt-bindings. >>> >>> There is no syscon series anymore, it's part of the PLL series now: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20230414024157.53203-1-xingyu.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >>> >>> I don't really care what you, Walker & Xingyu decide to do, but add the >>> binding in one series in a complete form. It's far less confusing to >>> have only have one version of the binding on the go at once. >>> >> >> Due to the current aon pmu needs to be adjusted, it affects the syscon in PLL series. >> So It's inevitable to change syscon in PLL series. >> >> My current idea is PLL series don't add the aon_syscon node. I will add it in my >> aon pmu series in next version > > That's fine. Rob was happy with the clock related parts, which was the > original source of confusion there. > >> like this: >> >> aon_syscon: syscon@17010000 { >> compatible = "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu", "syscon"; > > The syscon does a bunch of things of which one is a pmu. I don't see a > reason to name this other than "starfive,jh100-aon-syscon". > OK, will replace "starfive,jh7110-aon-pmu" with "starfive,jh100-aon-syscon" in this series. Thanks, Changhuang
