Re: [PATCH 02/16] dt-bindings: soc: renesas: renesas,rzg2l-sysc: Add #reset-cells for RZ/G3S

[Conor Dooley]

On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 10:54:06AM +0300, claudiu beznea wrote:
> Hi, Conor,
> 
> On 22.08.2024 19:42, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 06:27:47PM +0300, Claudiu wrote:
> >> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> The RZ/G3S System controller has registers to control signals that need
> >> to be de-asserted/asserted before/after different SoC areas are power
> >> on/off. This signals are implemented as reset signals. For this document
> >> the #reset-cells property.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>  .../bindings/soc/renesas/renesas,rzg2l-sysc.yaml | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas,rzg2l-sysc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas,rzg2l-sysc.yaml
> >> index 4386b2c3fa4d..6b0bb34485d9 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas,rzg2l-sysc.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas,rzg2l-sysc.yaml
> >> @@ -42,12 +42,28 @@ properties:
> >>        - const: cm33stbyr_int
> >>        - const: ca55_deny
> >>  
> >> +  "#reset-cells":
> >> +    const: 1
> >> +
> >>  required:
> >>    - compatible
> >>    - reg
> >>  
> >>  additionalProperties: false
> >>  
> >> +allOf:
> >> +  - if:
> >> +      properties:
> >> +        compatible:
> >> +          contains:
> >> +            const: renesas,r9a08g045-sysc
> >> +    then:
> >> +      required:
> >> +        - "#reset-cells"
> > 
> > Given this is new required property on an existing platform, I'd expect
> > some mention of why it used to be okay to not have this but is now
> > required. Did firmware or a bootloader stage take things out of reset?
> 
> On previous SoCs the SYS controller has no support for controlling the
> signals going to different peripherals (USB, PCIE in case of RZ/G3S).
> I'll add a note about this on next version.

My initial thought here wasn't about previous SoCs though, it was
because you didn't add the compatible in this series for /this/ SoC.
What's worth noting isn't about the prior SoCs, it is about what makes
it okay for this one.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature