Le sam., avril 9 2022 at 14:47:23 +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
On 09/04/2022 14:37, Paul Cercueil wrote:
The true question is whether you need simple-mfd. Isn't the binding
(and
the driver) expected to instantiate its children?
I can explain that one. There is the EFUSE controller located inside
the nemc's memory area, and the two are pretty much unrelated, hence
the "simple-mfd" compatible string.
I saw the efuse children and that's why I asked who is expected to
populate them. You said that simple-mfd is required for this, I say
no.
It should work without simple-mfd...
I am kind of repeating myself but I really do not see the need of
simple-mfd in the bindings.
Well, it is a "simple MFD", so I don't see why we can't use the
"simple-mfd" compatible. Why would we not want to use it?
Besides, if the nemc driver is responsible for populating the efuse
device, that means the nemc driver must be enabled for the efuse to
work, which is nonsense, the two IP blocks being unrelated.
-Paul
