On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 8:26 AM Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 02/09/2019 16:39, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 03:18:07PM +0300, Tero Kristo wrote:
> >> Add new binding for OMAP PRM (Power and Reset Manager) instances. Each
> >> of these will act as a power domain controller and potentially as a reset
> >> provider.
> >>
> >
> > Converting this to schema would be nice.
>
> Do you have documentation about schema somewhere? Basically what I need
> to do to fix this.
Documentation/devicetree/writing-schema.md (.rst in -next)
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml
> >> Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/omap/prm-inst.txt | 31 +++++++++++++++++++
> >
> > bindings/reset/
>
> I did not put this under reset, because this is basically a
> multi-purpose function. Reset just happens to be the first functionality
> it is going to provide. It will be followed by power domain support
> later on.
>
> Any thoughts?
I prefer that bindings be complete as possible even if driver support
is not there yet. Adding power domain support may only mean adding
'#power-domain-cells'.
The location is fine then.
> >> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/omap/prm-inst.txt
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/omap/prm-inst.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/omap/prm-inst.txt
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 000000000000..7c7527c37734
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/omap/prm-inst.txt
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> >> +OMAP PRM instance bindings
> >> +
> >> +Power and Reset Manager is an IP block on OMAP family of devices which
> >> +handle the power domains and their current state, and provide reset
> >> +handling for the domains and/or separate IP blocks under the power domain
> >> +hierarchy.
> >> +
> >> +Required properties:
> >> +- compatible: Must be one of:
> >> + "ti,am3-prm-inst"
> >> + "ti,am4-prm-inst"
> >> + "ti,omap4-prm-inst"
> >> + "ti,omap5-prm-inst"
> >> + "ti,dra7-prm-inst"
> >
> > '-inst' seems a bit redundant.
>
> ti,xyz-prm is already reserved by the parent node of all these.
>
> The hierarchy is basically like this (omap4 as example):
>
> prm: prm@4a306000 {
> compatible = "ti,omap4-prm";
> ...
>
> prm_dsp: prm@400 {
> compatible = "ti,omap4-prm-inst";
> ...
> };
>
> prm_device: prm@1b00 {
> compatible = "ti,omap4-prm-inst";
> ...
> };
>
> ...
> };
Okay. Then you need to state this binding must be a child of PRM. The
schema would need to take this into account too, so probably best to
not convert this yet.
Rob
