[PATCH v2 1/7] dt-bindings: iommu: mediatek: Add phandles for mediatek infra/pericfg

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 01:42:20PM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 18/05/22 13:29, Matthias Brugger ha scritto:
> > 
> > 
> > On 18/05/2022 12:04, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > Add properties "mediatek,infracfg" and "mediatek,pericfg" to let the
> > > mtk_iommu driver retrieve phandles to the infracfg and pericfg syscon(s)
> > > instead of performing a per-soc compatible lookup.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno at collabora.com>
> > > ---
> > >   .../devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml         | 8 ++++++++
> > >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git
> > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml
> > > index 2ae3bbad7f1a..c4af41947593 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iommu/mediatek,iommu.yaml
> > > @@ -101,6 +101,10 @@ properties:
> > >       items:
> > >         - const: bclk
> > > +  mediatek,infracfg:
> > > +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
> > > +    description: The phandle to the mediatek infracfg syscon
> > > +
> > >     mediatek,larbs:
> > >       $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
> > >       minItems: 1
> > > @@ -112,6 +116,10 @@ properties:
> > >         Refer to bindings/memory-controllers/mediatek,smi-larb.yaml. It must sort
> > >         according to the local arbiter index, like larb0, larb1, larb2...
> > > +  mediatek,pericfg:
> > > +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
> > > +    description: The phandle to the mediatek pericfg syscon
> > > +
> > 
> > I didn't explain myself. What I was suguesting was to squash the patch
> > that add requiered mediatek,infracfg with the patch that adds
> > mediatk,infracfg to the binding description. And then squash the both
> > patches adding pericfg as well.
> 
> Sorry Matthias, I'm not sure ... I think I'm misunderstanding you again...
> ...but if I'm not, I don't think that squashing actual code and bindings together
> is something acceptable?
> 
> I've made that kind of mistake in the past and I was told multiple times that
> dt-bindings changes shall be sent separately from the actual driver changes.

Combine patches 1 and 6 is the suggestion, not driver changes.

Rob