On 08.10.2021 22:49, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 10:08:46PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
On 08.10.2021 21:48, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, 08 Oct 2021 17:39:38 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
This reverts commit 2ae80900f239484069569380e1fc4340fd6e0089.
My rework was unneeded & wrong. It replaced a clear & correct "reg"
property usage with a custom "offset" one.
Back then I didn't understand how to properly handle CRU block binding.
I heard / read about syscon and tried to use it in a totally invalid
way. That change also missed Rob's review (obviously).
Northstar's pin controller is a simple consistent hardware block that
can be cleanly mapped using a 0x24 long reg space.
Since the rework commit there wasn't any follow up modifying in-kernel
DTS files to use the new binding. Broadcom also isn't known to use that
bugged binding. There is close to zero chance this revert may actually
cause problems / regressions.
This commit is a simple revert. Example binding may (should) be updated
/ cleaned up but that can be handled separately.
Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
V2: Update brcm,cru.yaml to avoid new yamllint warnings/errors
---
.../devicetree/bindings/mfd/brcm,cru.yaml | 11 +++++----
.../bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.yaml | 23 +++++++++++--------
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
yamllint warnings/errors:
dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
/builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,ns-pinmux.example.dt.yaml: cru@1800c100: $nodename:0: 'cru@1800c100' does not match '^([a-z][a-z0-9\\-]+-bus|bus|soc|axi|ahb|apb)(@[0-9a-f]+)?$'
From schema: /usr/local/lib/python3.8/dist-packages/dtschema/schemas/simple-bus.yaml
It's warning we already have and not something introduced by this
revert.
We don't allow warnings, so you're saying this one was warning before?
Yes.
As a revert this commit should introduce as little non-revert changes
as possible. I'm planning to improve that example later in a separated
commit.
You have to fix the warning as part of this series.
OK
Can you take a look at this commit despite your bot warning, please?
If 'CRU' is a hardware block, then I don't think most of the revert is
right to use 'simple-bus'.
If you want to just replace 'offset' with 'reg', then I'd be happy to
see that. I've been pushing child nodes of syscons in that direction.
Well, it's a revert, not a fix, it goes from totally wrong to semi-wrong
;) Let me send V3.
