Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/2] devicetree: bindings: mux: reg-mux: Update bindings for reg-mux for new property

[Vankar, Chintan]

Hello Rob,

On 3/4/2025 9:09 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:53:05PM +0530, Chintan Vankar wrote:
> > DT-binding of reg-mux is defined in such a way that one need to provide
> > register offset and mask in a "mux-reg-masks" property and corresponding
> > register value in "idle-states" property. This constraint forces to define
> > these values in such a way that "mux-reg-masks" and "idle-states" must be
> > in sync with each other. This implementation would be more complex if
> > specific register or set of registers need to be configured which has
> > large memory space. Introduce a new property "mux-reg-masks-state" which
> > allow to specify offset, mask and value as a tuple in a single property.
>
> Maybe in hindsight that would have been better, but having 2 ways to
> specify the same thing that we have to maintain forever is not an
> improvement.
>
> No one is making you use this binding. If you have a large number of
> muxes, then maybe you should use a specific binding.

Thank you for reviewing the patch. The reason behind choosing mux
subsystem is working and implementation of mmio driver. As we can see
that implementing this new property in mux-controller is almost
identical to mmio driver, and it would make it easier to define and 
extend mux-controller's functionality. If we introduce the new driver
than that would be most likely a clone of mmio driver.

Let me know if implementation would be accepted by adding a new
compatible for it.


Regards,
Chintan.

> Rob