> -----Original Message-----
> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2025 11:29 PM
> To: Wilson Ding <dingwei@xxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> robh@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: andrew@xxxxxxx; gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxx;
> sebastian.hesselbarth@xxxxxxxxx; krzk+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; conor+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Sanghoon Lee <salee@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Geethasowjanya Akula <gakula@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] arm64: dts: marvell: cp11x: Add reset
> controller node
>
> On 04/03/2025 20:08, Wilson Ding wrote:
> >
> > I did consider shrinking the syscon's register address range to make
> > the reset-controller node to be independent from the syscon node.
> > However, I found the syscon node is also referred by some devices for
> > miscellaneous configurations . The reset configuration register
> > happens to be located in between these registers and clock/GPIO
> > registers.
> >
> >> drop offset in your patch or unify everything into 'reg'.
> >>
> >
> > This is exactly what I proposed in v3 patch. Do I misunderstand you?
> >
> > CP11X_LABEL(swrst): reset-controller@268 {
> > compatible = "marvell,armada8k-reset";
> > reg = <0x268 0x4>;
> > #reset-cells = <1>;
> > };
>
> I don't see the other device being fixed here. How did you unify them?
This patch series is about the proposal of Armada8K's reset controller
dt-binding. The dt-bindings issues of clock/GPIO controllers have been
there for years. Having to say, it is not just a simple patch to fix it. It
will require to convert the dt-binding document into json schemas as
well as adapt these dt changes in the drivers. So I would suggest to
fixing it in later patches. How do you think about it?
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
