On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 06:20:38PM +0100, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 1 Sep 2023, at 16:42, Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 10:33:13AM +0800, William Qiu wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2023/8/30 16:34, Conor Dooley wrote: > >>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 09:29:20AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> On 30/08/2023 08:50, Conor Dooley wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 11:18:44AM +0800, William Qiu wrote: > >>>>>> Due to the change of tuning implementation, it's no longer necessary to > >>>>>> use the "starfive,sysreg" property in dts, so drop the relevant > >>>>>> description in dt-bindings here. > >>>>> > >>>>> How does changing your software implantation invalidate a description of > >>>>> the hardware? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> Which is kind of proof that this syscon was just to substitute > >>>> incomplete hardware description (e.g. missing clocks and phys). We > >>>> should have rejected it. Just like we should reject them in the future. > >>> > >>> :s I dunno what to do with this... I'm inclined to say not to remove it > >>> from the binding or dts at all & only change the software. > >>> > >>>> There are just few cases where syscon is reasonable. All others is just > >>>> laziness. It's not only starfivetech, of course. Several other > >>>> contributors do the same. > >>> > >>> I'm not sure if laziness is fair, lack of understanding is usually more > >>> likely. > >> > >> For this, I tend to keep it in binding, but remove it from required. Because > >> we only modify the tuning implementation, it doesn't mean that this property > >> need to be removed, it's just no longer be the required one. > > > > Please only remove it from required if the current driver doesn't break > > if the regmap is removed. > > Either way please make sure the documentation clearly states “never use > this, if you’re using it you’re doing it wrong, this only exists > because it was wrongly used in the past”. Otherwise people writing > drivers for other OSes will probably use it too thinking they need to. Maybe we should just delete it if the impact is going to be negligible, sounds like you're not using it in FreeBSD, which was part of what I was worried about. Guess it depends on what Emil & the distro heads think.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
