Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: Add NPCM reset status support

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 04:59:18PM +0200, Tomer Maimon wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 at 16:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >>>>> +  syscon:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> First iteration. See "How to Get Your DT Schema Bindings Accepted in
> > >>>> Less Than 10 Iterations"
> > >>>>
> > >>> Thanks, it was very helpful.
> > >>> the syscon property is already found in the WD node
> > >>> in nuvoton-common-npcm8xx.dtsi file, what should I do:
> > >>
> > >> How is that file related to this binding?
> > >>
> > >> Either you document existing ABI or you add new (for new device). Commit
> > >> msg MUST be explicit about it and provide the reasons. If wrong (e.g.
> > >> discouraged) ABI was already used then it depends how and when it got
> > >> into the kernel, e.g. if someone bypassed DT completely just to get it
> > >> inside.
> > >>
> > > The syscon property is already used in the upstream NPCM8xx DTSI watchdog
> > > node, so I will document it as existing ABI and mark it deprecated. I
> > will
> >
> > And how it is used? I cannot find its usage, so I do not agree on
> > documenting it. Property should be removed or at least provide the
> > justification/impact of removal, if you need it to stay.
> >
> > Understood. The syscon phandle is used by the watchdog driver to read and

You messed up quotes.

Can you point me to the line? I REALLY want to be sure that we are not
wasting each other time, e.g. me looking at wrong code or you telling me
some bollocks from downstream.

> clear the GCR reset‑status registers and then report the reset cause
> through the watchdog bootstatus bits.
> Therefore, this property should appear in the binding only because the
> watchdog driver actually uses it — which I am implementing in this patch
> set.
> I will document it accordingly, and also add the new nuvoton,sysgcr phandle
> as the preferred name.

Best regards,
Krzysztof