On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 01:14:45PM +0200, Marek Behún wrote: > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 10:23:37AM +0200, Marek Behún wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 04:43:54PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 02:11:06PM +0200, Marek Behún wrote: > > > > Add binding for cznic,turris-omnia-mcu, the device-tree node > > > > representing the system-controller features provided by the MCU on the > > > > Turris Omnia router. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marek Behún <kabel@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > .../bindings/arm/cznic,turris-omnia-mcu.yaml | 86 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > > Why's this in bindings/arm btw? Seems like it is some remote firmware if > > > it is running off-SoC on an MCU, so either remoteproc or firmware would > > > make more sense? Tying it to arm at least needs an explanation IMO. > > > > This was discussed with Krzysztof in v1, you can look it up at > > https://lore.kernel.org/soc/20230824131736.067c40e2@dellmb/ > > > > Basically the SoC is an ARM board, and the MCU is also always ARM. > > What I wrote does not make sense. I wanted to say is that the driver > drives the peripherals implemented by the Turris Omnia MCU firmware, and > the Turris Omnia router is based on an ARM SoC, and that the MCU is also > an ARM-based MCU. Yeah, it didn't really make sense, but I read between the lines. FWIW, I still don't really think that bindings/arm is the right place for it. > > > > > I'm guessing firmware would also make sense... > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
