Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ARM: dts: add Netronix E60K02 board common file

[Andreas Kemnade]

Hi Shawn,

On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 17:14:04 +0800
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 05:56:44PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 18:56:33 +0200
> > Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >   
> > > On 19-10-11 18:19, Andreas Kemnade wrote:  
> > > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:22:14 +0200
> > > > Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >     
> > > > > On 19-10-11 17:05, Andreas Kemnade wrote:    
> > > > > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 09:29:27 -0500
> > > > > > Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >       
> > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 09:41:48AM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote:      
> > > > > > > > On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 08:56:09 +0200
> > > > > > > > Marco Felsch <m.felsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > >         
> > > > > > > > > Hi Andreas,
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > On 19-10-10 21:23, Andreas Kemnade wrote:        
> > > > > > > > > > The Netronix board E60K02 can be found some several Ebook-Readers,
> > > > > > > > > > at least the Kobo Clara HD and the Tolino Shine 3. The board
> > > > > > > > > > is equipped with different SoCs requiring different pinmuxes.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > For now the following peripherals are included:
> > > > > > > > > > - LED
> > > > > > > > > > - Power Key
> > > > > > > > > > - Cover (gpio via hall sensor)
> > > > > > > > > > - RC5T619 PMIC (the kernel misses support for rtc and charger
> > > > > > > > > >   subdevices).
> > > > > > > > > > - Backlight via lm3630a
> > > > > > > > > > - Wifi sdio chip detection (mmc-powerseq and stuff)
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > It is based on vendor kernel but heavily reworked due to many
> > > > > > > > > > changed bindings.
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > > Changes in v3:
> > > > > > > > > > - better led name
> > > > > > > > > > - correct memory size
> > > > > > > > > > - comments about missing devices
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > > > > > > > - reordered, was 1/3
> > > > > > > > > > - moved pinmuxes to their actual users, not the parents
> > > > > > > > > >   of them
> > > > > > > > > > - removed some already-disabled stuff
> > > > > > > > > > - minor cleanups          
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > You won't change the muxing, so a this dtsi can be self contained?
> > > > > > > > >         
> > > > > > > > So you want me to put a big 
> > > > > > > > #if defined(MX6SLL)         
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Not sure what the comment meant, but no, don't do this. C defines in dts 
> > > > > > > files are for symbolic names for numbers and assembling bitfields and 
> > > > > > > that's it.      
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > yes, that is also my opinion. For now, there is only one user
> > > > > > of this .dtsi, but I have another one in preparation. That is the
> > > > > > reason for splitting things between .dts and .dtsi to avoid such ugly
> > > > > > ifdefs      
> > > > > 
> > > > > Then IMHO the pnictrl-* entries shouldn't appear in the dsti.
> > > > >     
> > > > hmm, maybe now I understand your idea:
> > > > You do not want only to have
> > > > 
> > > >   pinctrl_lm3630a_bl_gpio: lm3630a_bl_gpio_grp {
> > > >                         fsl,pins = <
> > > >                                 MX6SLL_PAD_EPDC_PWR_CTRL3__GPIO2_IO10   0x10059 /* HWEN */    
> > > >                         >;    
> > > >                 };
> > > > in dts, but also  do not have these in .dtsi:
> > > > 
> > > >                 pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > >                 pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_lm3630a_bl_gpio>;
> > > > 
> > > > and instead have in dts:
> > > > &lm3630a {
> > > >  	pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > >         pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_lm3630a_bl_gpio>;
> > > > 	
> > > > };
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > just to make sure I get it right before doing the restructuring work. That way of structuring things did not come to my mind, but then the .dtsi is self-contained.    
> > > 
> > > That is what I mean but wait for Shawn's comments. It's just my opinion
> > > that .dtsi and .dts files should be self-contained.  
> > 
> > for files like the imx6sll.dtsi, I would clearly agree, here it might
> > hide errors like missing pinmuxes in the dts, so it is not so clear.
> > But if there is is consensus about .dtsi being self-contained I will not
> > refuse to restructurize my work.  
> 
> Yes, I would appreciate the effort of keep .dtsi being self-contained.

ok, then I will restructurize as proposed and create a v4 this weekend.

Regards,
Andreas