Hi Takahiro, first, thanks for working on this important and crucial driver! I'll try to clarify and also explain something of what the others are saying (unless I misunderstand them...) On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 4:17 AM AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > A dt binding for SCMI pinctrl based gpio driver is defined in this > commit. It basically conforms to generic pinctrl-gpio mapping framework. > > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@xxxxxxxxxx> I think like Christian says that SCMI maybe has nothing to do with this binding? It is just one possible use case (though we don't know of any others.) The resource it is using is generic functionality that exist in any pin controller that provides ways to drive lines high and low etc. Would it be named a generic pin control-based GPIO? (...) > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/arm,scmi-gpio.yaml (...) > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/gpio/arm,scmi-gpio.yaml# So no ARM, no scmi, just pin-control-gpio.yaml, be bold! (I like this long unabbreviated name) > +title: SCMI pinctrl based generic GPIO controller Pin control-based generic GPIO controller Add description: The pin control-based GPIO will facilitate a pin controllers ability to drive electric lines high/low and other generic properties of a pin controller to perform general-purpose one-bit binary I/O. (At least I think this is the idea, I hope I understand correctly.) > +properties: > + $nodename: > + pattern: "^scmi_gpio(@[0-9a-f]+)$" These nodes are always just named gpio@... the resource marker is "this is a GPIO" that's all it means. > + compatible: > + const: arm,scmi-gpio-generic const: pin-control-gpio Other than that I am aboard with the solution! Yours, Linus Walleij
