On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:43:16AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 06:29:55PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > Rework the pm8008 binding by dropping internal details like register > > offsets and interrupts and by adding the missing regulator and > > temperature alarm properties. > > > > Note that child nodes are still used for pinctrl and regulator > > configuration. > > > > Also note that the pinctrl state definition will be extended later and > > could eventually also be shared with other PMICs (e.g. by breaking out > > bits of qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml). > > Obviously we want to adapt this style of bindings for the other PMICs > too. My main concern here are PMICs which have two kinds of controlled > pins: GPIOs and MPPs. With the existing bindings style those are > declared as two subdevices. What would be your suggested way to support > MPPs with the proposed kind of bindings? As far as I understand newer PMICs do not have MPP blocks and we do not necessarily want to convert the existing bindings. That said, if there is ever a need to describe two separate gpio blocks this can, for example, be done using subnodes on those PMICs. Johan
