[PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: mediatek: mt8365: Describe infracfg-nao as a pure syscon

[David Lechner]

On 5/2/25 11:43 AM, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> The infracfg-nao register space at 0x1020e000 has different registers
> than the infracfg space at 0x10001000, and most importantly, doesn't
> contain any clock controls. Therefore it shouldn't use the same
> compatible used for the mt8365 infracfg clocks driver:
> mediatek,mt8365-infracfg. Since it currently does, probe errors are
> reported in the kernel logs:
> 
>   [    0.245959] Failed to register clk ifr_pmic_tmr: -EEXIST
>   [    0.245998] clk-mt8365 1020e000.infracfg: probe with driver clk-mt8365 failed with error -17
> 
> This register space is used only as a syscon for bus control by the
> power domain controller, so in order to properly describe it and fix the
> errors, set its compatible to a distinct compatible used exclusively as
> a syscon, drop the clock-cells, and while at it rename the node to
> 'syscon' following the naming convention.
> 
> Fixes: 6ff945376556 ("arm64: dts: mediatek: Initial mt8365-evk support")
> Signed-off-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado at collabora.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8365.dtsi | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8365.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8365.dtsi
> index e6d2b3221a3b7a855129258b379ae4bc2fd05449..49ad4dee9c4cf563743dc55d5e0b055cfb69986a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8365.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8365.dtsi
> @@ -495,10 +495,9 @@ iommu: iommu at 10205000 {
>  			#iommu-cells = <1>;
>  		};
>  
> -		infracfg_nao: infracfg at 1020e000 {
> -			compatible = "mediatek,mt8365-infracfg", "syscon";
> +		infracfg_nao: syscon at 1020e000 {
> +			compatible = "mediatek,mt8365-infracfg-nao", "syscon";
>  			reg = <0 0x1020e000 0 0x1000>;
> -			#clock-cells = <1>;
>  		};
>  
>  		rng: rng at 1020f000 {
> 

Reviewed-by: David Lechner <dlechner at baylibre.com>

It looks like this never got picked up. I noticed this was a problem in U-Boot
because it was registering this as a clock provider. And I sent a similar patch
[1] recently that has also not been acted on yet. I prefer this patch since it
also fixes the node name to use a standard name. Who should be responsible for
actually picking up the patch?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mediatek/20251216-mtk-fix-infracfg_nao-compatibile-v1-1-d339b151ac81@baylibre.com/