On 12/04/2024 15:12, Neil Armstrong wrote: > Hi, > > On 29/03/2024 20:39, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 29/03/2024 10:17, Kelvin Zhang via B4 Relay wrote: >>> From: Zelong Dong <zelong.dong@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Add a new compatible and the related header file >>> for Amlogic T7 Reset Controller. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Zelong Dong <zelong.dong@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Kelvin Zhang <kelvin.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/reset/amlogic,meson-reset.yaml | 1 + >>> include/dt-bindings/reset/amlogic,t7-reset.h | 197 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 198 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/amlogic,meson-reset.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/amlogic,meson-reset.yaml >>> index f0c6c0df0ce3..fefe343e5afe 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/amlogic,meson-reset.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/amlogic,meson-reset.yaml >>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ properties: >>> - amlogic,meson-a1-reset # Reset Controller on A1 and compatible SoCs >>> - amlogic,meson-s4-reset # Reset Controller on S4 and compatible SoCs >>> - amlogic,c3-reset # Reset Controller on C3 and compatible SoCs >>> + - amlogic,t7-reset # Reset Controller on T7 and compatible SoCs >>> >> >> If there is going to be any resend, please drop the comment. It's not >> really helpful and makes it trickier to read. >> >>> reg: >>> maxItems: 1 >>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/reset/amlogic,t7-reset.h b/include/dt-bindings/reset/amlogic,t7-reset.h >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..ca4a832eeeec >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/reset/amlogic,t7-reset.h >>> @@ -0,0 +1,197 @@ >>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR MIT) */ >>> +/* >>> + * Copyright (c) 2024 Amlogic, Inc. All rights reserved. >>> + */ >>> + >>> +#ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_AMLOGIC_T7_RESET_H >>> +#define _DT_BINDINGS_AMLOGIC_T7_RESET_H >>> + >>> +/* RESET0 */ >>> +/* 0-3 */ >> >> I assume this matches existing drivers which do not use IDs but map the >> binding to hardware value? I remember we talked about changing it, so if >> something happened about this and it could be changed: please change. > > I'm not aware of such discussion, and I don't really see the issue... > thoses are IDs, and yes they match the Hardware offsets, and ? Bindings are not for hardware offsets/values/addresses. It's just not a binding. I quickly looked at your driver patch and it confirms: not a binding. Binding constant is used by the driver and DTS consumer. I am really sure we had this talk in the past, but could be I think about different platform. Since this is not a binding, I do not think claiming there is any ABI here is reasonable. Feel free to store them with other hardware values, like in DTS headers etc. We already moved to DTS headers several such "non-binding" constants. Best regards, Krzysztof
