Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Add StarFive JH7110 pinctrl definitions

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 29/11/2022 02:47, Jianlong Huang wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:32:45 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 28/11/2022 01:48, Jianlong Huang wrote:
>>
>>>>>> +/* aon_iomux doen */
>>>>>> +#define GPOEN_AON_PTC0_OE_N_4			2
>>>>>> +#define GPOEN_AON_PTC0_OE_N_5			3
>>>>>> +#define GPOEN_AON_PTC0_OE_N_6			4
>>>>>> +#define GPOEN_AON_PTC0_OE_N_7			5
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like you add register constants to the bindings. Why? The
>>>>> bindings are not the place to represent hardware programming model. Not
>>>>> mentioning that there is no benefit in this.
>>>>
>>>> Also: this entire file should be dropped, but if it stays, you have to
>>>> name it matching bindings or compatible (vendor,device.h).
>>>
>>> Thanks your comments.
>>> These macros are used to configure pinctrl in dts, so the file should stay,
>>
>> Why they should stay? What's the reason? If it is not a constant used by
>> driver, then register values should not be placed in the bindings, so
>> drop it.
>>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> These macros in binding header(example, DOUT, DOEN etc) will be used in DTS,
> and driver will parse the DT for pinctrl configuration.
> 
> Example in dts:
> uart0_pins: uart0-0 {
> 	tx-pins {
> 		pinmux = <GPIOMUX(5, GPOUT_SYS_UART0_TX, GPOEN_ENABLE, GPI_NONE)>;

This is usage in DTS and is not an argument to store register
addresses/offsets as bindings. What is the usage (of define, not value)
in the driver?


Best regards,
Krzysztof