Hi Wolfram,
On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 12:04 PM Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The "@<unit-address>" part is optional.
>
> Ah! Then, I actually prefer dropping the unit address.
Fine for me!
> > Actually, I cannot find that in the DT spec, only:
> >
> > "If the node has no reg property, the @unit-address must be omitted".
>
> Sounds good to me. However, sh73a0 and r8a73a4 are still a bit strange.
> They have a unit-address because they have a reg-property which is
> documented for renesas,bsc. However, there is no driver for the BSC.
> AFAICS, this could work as well with "simple-pm-bus" and we could drop
> the renesas,bsc bindings? This probably is a separate issue, though.
You can have DT bindings without a (full) driver.
Probably the other (L)BSC variants could be extended with a register
block and interrupts, too, but so far we didn't have a need to
describe them fully.
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
