On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 08:29:43AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 29/08/2023 05:21, Binbin Zhou wrote: > > HI Conor: > > > > Thanks for your reply. > > > > On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 11:49 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 08:38:32PM +0800, Binbin Zhou wrote: > >>> Document the Power Management Unit system controller compatible for > >>> Loongson-2K2000. > >>> > >>> This is a missing compatible, now we add it. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Binbin Zhou <zhoubinbin@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/loongson/loongson,ls2k-pmc.yaml | 1 + > >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/loongson/loongson,ls2k-pmc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/loongson/loongson,ls2k-pmc.yaml > >>> index da2dcfeebf12..7473c5659929 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/loongson/loongson,ls2k-pmc.yaml > >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/loongson/loongson,ls2k-pmc.yaml > >>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ properties: > >>> - enum: > >>> - loongson,ls2k0500-pmc > >>> - loongson,ls2k1000-pmc > >>> + - loongson,ls2k2000-pmc > >> > >> Same thing here as the driver patch, the pmc on this newly added SoC > >> appears to use the same codepaths as the existing ones. Does it share a > >> programming model & should there be a fallback compatible here? > > > > I noticed the guideline about fallback compatible: > > > > "DO use fallback compatibles when devices are the same as or a subset > > of prior implementations." > > > > But in fact, ls2k0500/ls2k1000/ls2k2000 are independent, there is no subset. > > We do not consider here ls2k0500/ls2k1000/ls2k2000, but PMC in each of > them. If they are independent, why would they use the same interface? > > > Can we define a "loongson,ls2k-pmc" superset for each ls2k SoC > > compatible fallback. > > > > Such as: > > > > compatible: > > oneOf: > > - enum: > > - loongson,ls2k0500-pmc > > - loongson,ls2k1000-pmc > > - loongson,ls2k2000-pmc > > - const: loongson,ls2k-pmc > > This is discouraged. Use 0500 as fallback. The "code" here is also invalid, the oneOf would been to be items.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
