Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 3 Sep 2022 17:12:54 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Marek =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beh=FAn?= <kabel@kernel.org>
Cc:     Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= <pali@kernel.org>,
        Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
        Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: turris-omnia: Add mcu node
Message-ID: <YxNu9sXY5UhVCZ+w@lunn.ch>
References: <20220819131152.6513-1-pali@kernel.org>
 <20220831142809.lcmnv3l4rnulo522@pali>
 <YxE2JqJutZ0ilghH@lunn.ch>
 <20220903043828.6afd3ab4@thinkpad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220903043828.6afd3ab4@thinkpad>
Precedence: bulk

> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-385-turris-omnia.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-385-turris-omnia.dts
> > > > index f4878df39753..f655e9229d68 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-385-turris-omnia.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-385-turris-omnia.dts
> > > > @@ -184,7 +184,13 @@
> > > >  			#size-cells = <0>;
> > > >  			reg = <0>;
> > > >  
> > > > -			/* STM32F0 command interface at address 0x2a */
> > > > +			/* MCU command i2c API */
> > > > +			mcu: mcu@2a {
> > > > +				compatible = "cznic,turris-omnia-mcu";
> > > > +				reg = <0x2a>;
> > > > +				gpio-controller;
> > > > +				#gpio-cells = <3>;
> > > > +			};  
> > 
> > Please document the binding, preferably in yaml.
> > 
> > I'm also not sure what the DT people will say about the node name mcu.
> > I don't see any examples of that in the binding documentation. They
> > might request you rename it to gpio-controller, unless it does more
> > than GPIO? And if it does do more than GPIO we are then into mfd
> > territory, and the binding then becomes much more interesting. Then we
> > start the questions, are you defining a ABI now, before there is even
> > a driver for it?
> 
> Most probably mfd territory. It is at least a gpio-controller,
> reset-controller and watchdog.

O.K.

Then i suggest we wait for the actual drivers before committing any
DT. The binding will need revier, and could change.

    Andrew