From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753882AbdFMXF7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 19:05:59 -0400 Received: from lelnx193.ext.ti.com ([198.47.27.77]:44597 "EHLO lelnx193.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752259AbdFMXF4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 19:05:56 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mfd: tps65217: remove duplicated interrupt resources. To: Enric Balletbo Serra CC: Enric Balletbo i Serra , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel , , Rob Herring , Tony Lindgren , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Russell King , Lee Jones , Sebastian Reichel , Javier Martinez Canillas References: <20170612212412.22719-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com> <20170612212412.22719-3-enric.balletbo@collabora.com> From: Grygorii Strashko Message-ID: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 18:05:32 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [128.247.59.147] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/13/2017 03:18 AM, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote: > Hi Grygorii, > > 2017-06-13 0:41 GMT+02:00 Grygorii Strashko : >> >> >> On 06/12/2017 04:24 PM, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote: >>> I don't think it makes sense to have the interrupt resources for charger >>> and power button in two different places, the driver and the DT binding. >>> That's confusing so remove the ones from the mfd driver in favour of >>> having the interrupt resources only described in the DT. Having the >>> resources in DT may help if there is or will be a similar pmic with >>> different resource allocation. >> >> Wouldn't this break DT compatibility? Old DTs do not contain IRQ resources >> and so they work only because of IRQ definitions in code. >> > > I don't think so, the DT binding [1] and [2] says that the interrupts > proprieties are required, so the bindings that that doesn't have these > proprieties are wrong. Also I suspect that the binding that doesn't > define the interrupts expect the hw block disabled as the status = > "disabled" was defined, so I don't think was his intention have i.e > the charger active. > > [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/tps65217_charger.txt > [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/tps65218-pwrbutton.txt Ok. fair enough. Anyway, personally I would prefer to remove irqs from DT, but as both points are valid - its up to maintainers to decide. -- regards, -grygorii