On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 10:03:20AM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 2023-09-04 12:58, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > Add rockchip,io-domains property to the Rockchip pinctrl driver. This > > list of phandles points to the IO domain device(s) the pins of the > > pinctrl driver are supplied from. > > > > Also a rockchip,io-domain-boot-on property is added to pin groups > > which can be used for pin groups which themselves are needed to access > > the regulators an IO domain is driven from. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../bindings/pinctrl/rockchip,pinctrl.yaml | 13 ++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/rockchip,pinctrl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/rockchip,pinctrl.yaml > > index 10c335efe619e..92075419d29cf 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/rockchip,pinctrl.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/rockchip,pinctrl.yaml > > @@ -62,6 +62,11 @@ properties: > > Required for at least rk3188 and rk3288. On the rk3368 this should > > point to the PMUGRF syscon. > > + rockchip,io-domains: > > + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array > > + description: > > + Phandles to io domains > > + > > "#address-cells": > > enum: [1, 2] > > @@ -137,7 +142,13 @@ additionalProperties: > > - description: > > The phandle of a node contains the generic pinconfig options > > to use as described in pinctrl-bindings.txt. > > - > > + rockchip,io-domain-boot-on: > > I don't think "on" is a particularly descriptive or useful property name for > something that has no "off" state. In fact it has an "off" state. A IO Domain can be disabled in the SoC registers and also the corresponding regulator can be disabled. > Furthermore it's no help at all if the DT > consumer *is* the bootloader that's expected to configure this in the first > place. IMO it would seem a lot more sensible to have an integer (or enum) > property which describes the actual value for the initial I/O domain > setting. I agree though that a particular setting instead of a boolean is better and could help the bootloader. > Then Linux can choose to assume the presence of the property at all > implies that the bootloader should have set it up already, but also has the > option of actively enforcing it as well if we want to. Ok. Thanks, Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
