Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200728100321.1691745-1-daniel@0x0f.com> <20200728100321.1691745-2-daniel@0x0f.com>
 <20200728191842.GB2778962@bogus>
In-Reply-To: <20200728191842.GB2778962@bogus>
From:   Daniel Palmer <daniel@0x0f.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:13:54 +0900
Message-ID: <CAFr9PXkwpNAhQvOJFqLUm-uWoaH=nsNiq_y+OgTf8Z60i4RhRw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] dt-bindings: arm: mstar: Add binding details for mstar,pmsleep
To:     Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc:     SoC Team <soc@kernel.org>, DTML <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Rob,

On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 04:18, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote:

> > +properties:
> > +  compatible:
> > +    oneOf:
> > +      - items:
> > +         - enum:
> > +             - mstar,pmsleep
>
> Needs to be SoC specific. Random collections of bits are never
> 'standard' from one SoC to the next.

I don't have a manual for any of the chips so I can't say for sure but
so far all of the chips in this group (ARMv7 based MStar/Sigmastar)
has the same layout for the registers i.e. the reset register,
the resume address registers are at the same place for all of them.

Does calling it "mstar,pmsleepv7" make more sense? I'm not sure what
to call it really.

> If your never going to have child nodes, then you can just add the
> compatible to syscon.yaml.

Considering the above would it make sense to drop the specific
compatible string for now and just leave it as syscon until there is a reason
to make it more specific?

Thanks,

Daniel