Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20211006035407.1147909-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
 <20211006035407.1147909-2-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> <YXf6TbV2IpPbB/0Y@robh.at.kernel.org>
 <37b26090-945f-1e17-f6ab-52552a4b6d89@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <37b26090-945f-1e17-f6ab-52552a4b6d89@linaro.org>
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:53:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqLAnJqZ95_bf6_fFmPJFMjuy43UfP2UxzEmFMNnG_t-Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 01/15] dt-bindings: add pwrseq device tree bindings
To:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
        Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@mm-sol.com>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
        ath10k@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 9:42 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On 26/10/2021 15:53, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 06:53:53AM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> >> Add device tree bindings for the new power sequencer subsystem.
> >> Consumers would reference pwrseq nodes using "foo-pwrseq" properties.
> >> Providers would use '#pwrseq-cells' property to declare the amount of
> >> cells in the pwrseq specifier.
> >
> > Please use get_maintainers.pl.
> >
> > This is not a pattern I want to encourage, so NAK on a common binding.
>
>
> Could you please spend a few more words, describing what is not
> encouraged? The whole foo-subsys/#subsys-cells structure?

No, that's generally how common provider/consumer style bindings work.

> Or just specifying the common binding?

If we could do it again, I would not have mmc pwrseq binding. The
properties belong in the device's node. So don't generalize the mmc
pwrseq binding.

It's a kernel problem if the firmware says there's a device on a
'discoverable' bus and the kernel can't discover it. I know you have
the added complication of a device with 2 interfaces, but please,
let's solve one problem at a time.

Rob