Re: [PATCH v5 04/10] dt-bindings: soc: google: gs101-pmu: allow power domains as children

["André Draszik" <andre.draszik@linaro.org>]

Hi Rob,

On Thu, 2026-02-12 at 14:06 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2026 at 6:03 AM André Draszik <andre.draszik@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> "google,gs101-pmu" represents some specific h/w. That h/w either has
> power domains or it doesn't. So which is it?

It does have power domains, they were missing during the initial submission of
bindings and DTS.

> 

> > The compatible doesn't change with these patches. So I'm not sure how to make
> > your suggestion work without causing warnings for existing DTs. We can either
> > have an old incomplete DT+binding:
> 
> If this is considered incomplete, then you are going to complete it
> and add the child nodes? If so, then the warnings are appropriate.

Yes, I'm going to update the relevant DTS to include power domains.

> If you were going to maintain both bindings forever, then you would
> probably want a new compatible. Or just drop the properties from
> required. Note that if you have child nodes with 'reg' and parent
> missing #address-cells or #size-cells, then dtc will warn about that.
> So it's not too important if the schema doesn't.

Maybe the commit message or footer comment was clear enough, sorry for that.
I never intended to support both old (incomplete) and new DT.

Dropping from required did cross my mind, as I also saw the warning about
missing #address-cells or #size-cells in that case. Missing 'ranges' would
still not trigger a warning, though.

So does my above explanation mean you're OK with the patch as such? I can
reword the commit message a bit to point out that while this binding update
breaks existing DTS, I will update them as they're simply incomplete.

Cheers,
Andre'