[v4,2/4] dt-binding: reset-controller: ti: add 'mediatek,infra-reset' to compatible

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 5:26 PM Suman Anna <s-anna at ti.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 8/26/20 6:09 AM, Crystal Guo wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 03:02 +0800, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 11:03:22AM +0800, Crystal Guo wrote:
> >>> The TI syscon reset controller provides a common reset management,
> >>> and is suitable for MTK SoCs. Add compatible 'mediatek,infra-reset',
> >>> which denotes to use ti reset-controller driver directly.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Crystal Guo <crystal.guo at mediatek.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/ti-syscon-reset.txt | 1 +
> >>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/ti-syscon-reset.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/ti-syscon-reset.txt
> >>> index ab041032339b..5a0e9365b51b 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/ti-syscon-reset.txt
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/ti-syscon-reset.txt
> >>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ Required properties:
> >>>                         "ti,k2l-pscrst"
> >>>                         "ti,k2hk-pscrst"
> >>>                         "ti,syscon-reset"
> >>> +                       "mediatek,infra-reset", "ti,syscon-reset"
> >>
> >> You need your own binding doc. If you can use the same driver then fine,
> >> but that's a separate issue. There's also reset-simple driver if you
> >> have just array of 32-bit registers with a bit per reset.
> >>
> >> Don't repeat 'ti,reset-bits' either.
> >
> > Do you mean I should add a Mediatek reset binding doc, although Mediatek
> > reuse the TI reset controller directly?
>
> Hmm, how do you envision not repeating the same bits in a separate binding?

I mean 'ti,reset-bits' isn't really something that should have been in
DT in the first place, but rather implied by the compatible string.

> Does it help if I convert this to YAML first without a ti, prefix in the file name?

No, I don't think this should be a shared binding. The driver may be
able to be shared, but that's independent from the binding.

Rob