Hi Krzysztof,
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 11:29 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 03/05/2022 08:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >>>> This should not be a reason why a property is or is not required. Either
> >>>> this is required for device operation or not. If it is required, should
> >>>> be in the bindings. Otherwise what are you going to do in the future?
> >>>> Add a required property breaking the ABI?
> >>>
> >>> The problem is that there are no bindings for the reset controller
> >>> (actually the reset controller feature of the system-controller) yet.
> >>> Yeah, we can just add #reset-cells = <1> to the system-controller
> >>> device node, but we cannot add the actual resets properties to the
> >>> consumers, until the actual cell values are defined.
> >>
> >> Sounds like you should implement providers first. Or just live with the
> >> warning as a reminder to implement the reset provider?
> >
> > I'd go for the latter. The upstream r9a06g032.dtsi is still under active
> > development. Until very recently, the only device supported was the
> > serial console.
>
> For clocks we use in such cases fixed-clock placeholders or empty
> phandles. Maybe something like that would work here as well?
I don't think that works for resets.
Besides, the driver doesn't need or use the reset anyway.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
