Quoting Gregory CLEMENT (2018-11-23 07:02:56)
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On ven., oct. 12 2018, Stephen Boyd <sb...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > +Rob
> >
> > Quoting Gregory CLEMENT (2018-09-22 11:17:09)
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-ap806.dtsi
> >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-ap806.dtsi
> >> index 4a65e4e830aa..27c840e91abe 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-ap806.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-ap806.dtsi
> >> @@ -280,6 +280,12 @@
> >> #address-cells = <1>;
> >> #size-cells = <1>;
> >>
> >> + cpu_clk: clock-cpu {
> >> + compatible =
> >> "marvell,ap806-cpu-clock";
> >> + clocks = <&ap_clk 0>, <&ap_clk 1>;
> >> + #clock-cells = <1>;
> >> + };
> >
> > This looks like the wrong place because there isn't a reg property. It
>
> There is no reg property because we are inside a syscon node where the
> registers are shared between multiple IPs.
The node right after this node has a reg property. What's going on?
>
> > should go to the root of the tree. And then it looks like we're adding
> > something to DT to get a driver to probe, which is improper DT design.
>
> There is nothing related to the driver, this subnode describes the way
> the hardware is designed. Under the system controller node there are
> several IPs , like the CPU clocks, but also the GPIO or the pinctrl.
>
Ok. And some of them have reg properties and others don't? We should
somehow deprecate the idea of a syscon with child nodes. It leads to
this weird twisting of DT. The only use for syscon from my perspective
is when we have a register region that other random devices with their
own 'reg' property need to peek/poke random things into.
