Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] drm/panfrost: Add support for multiple regulators
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@chromium.org>,
        Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
        Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa.rosenzweig@collabora.com>,
        hsinyi@chromium.org, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
References: <20200114071602.47627-1-drinkcat@chromium.org>
 <20200114071602.47627-5-drinkcat@chromium.org>
 <7e82cac2-efbf-806b-8c2e-04dbd0482b50@arm.com>
 <20200120170343.GE6852@sirena.org.uk>
From:   Steven Price <steven.price@arm.com>
Message-ID: <aed32f5e-34d9-966b-98d2-2af3d311894a@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Jan 2020 17:09:08 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200120170343.GE6852@sirena.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 20/01/2020 17:03, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 02:43:10PM +0000, Steven Price wrote:
> 
>> From discussions offline, I think I've come round to the view that
>> having a "soft PDC" in device tree isn't the right solution. Device tree
>> should be describing the hardware and that isn't actually a hardware
>> component.
> 
> You can use an implementation like that separately to it being in the
> device tree, it is perfectly possible to instantiate devices that have
> no representation at all in device tree based on other things that are
> there like board or SoC information, or as subdevices of things that are
> there.

Yes - and I may yet implement a "soft PDC" device if this turns out to
be more than a 'quirk' for a very small number of device. But like you
say - it doesn't need to be (and shouldn't be) in the actual device tree.

For now though I think the code Nicolas has written works well enough
and it's only really worth 'fixing' if we end up with too many 'quirky'
devices.

Steve