| Message ID | 20240605-topic-amlogic-upstream-bindings-fixes-power-domains-sardac-v1-1-40a8de6baa59@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: iio: adc: amlogic,meson-saradc: add optional power-domains | expand |
On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:37:08AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > On newer SoCs, the SAR ADC hardware can require a power-domain to operate, > add it as optional. What about the older socs that don't have power domains, the property is now usable there?
On 05/06/2024 18:58, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:37:08AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: >> On newer SoCs, the SAR ADC hardware can require a power-domain to operate, >> add it as optional. > > What about the older socs that don't have power domains, the property is > now usable there? Old SoCs doesn't necessarily have an associated power domain, or was handled by firmware, does it harm if we make it optional for older ones as well ? Neil
On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 09:54:22AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > On 05/06/2024 18:58, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:37:08AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > > On newer SoCs, the SAR ADC hardware can require a power-domain to operate, > > > add it as optional. > > > > What about the older socs that don't have power domains, the property is > > now usable there? > > Old SoCs doesn't necessarily have an associated power domain, or was handled > by firmware, does it harm if we make it optional for older ones as well ? I mean, really all of these devices have a power domain, even if the DT doesn't describe one as it's hardly gonna work without power, so the commit message just seems odd to me. I don't care enough to ask for a new commit message though. Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 17:21:17 +0100 Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 06, 2024 at 09:54:22AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > On 05/06/2024 18:58, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 11:37:08AM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote: > > > > On newer SoCs, the SAR ADC hardware can require a power-domain to operate, > > > > add it as optional. > > > > > > What about the older socs that don't have power domains, the property is > > > now usable there? > > > > Old SoCs doesn't necessarily have an associated power domain, or was handled > > by firmware, does it harm if we make it optional for older ones as well ? > > I mean, really all of these devices have a power domain, even if the DT > doesn't describe one as it's hardly gonna work without power, so the > commit message just seems odd to me. I don't care enough to ask for a > new commit message though. > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> Applied
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/amlogic,meson-saradc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/amlogic,meson-saradc.yaml index 7e8328e9ce13..f748f3a60b35 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/amlogic,meson-saradc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/amlogic,meson-saradc.yaml @@ -66,6 +66,9 @@ properties: nvmem-cell-names: const: temperature_calib + power-domains: + maxItems: 1 + allOf: - if: properties:
On newer SoCs, the SAR ADC hardware can require a power-domain to operate, add it as optional. Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/amlogic,meson-saradc.yaml | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) --- base-commit: c3f38fa61af77b49866b006939479069cd451173 change-id: 20240605-topic-amlogic-upstream-bindings-fixes-power-domains-sardac-0f9d22e7e558 Best regards,