On 20/05/2024 17:23, Alexandre Mergnat wrote:
Hello Krzysztof,I don't see how this could be related. The error is mentioning entirely
On 20/05/2024 12:12, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
Il 20/05/24 12:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:Unfortunately, The SCPSYS (@10006000) isn't documented, but according to the functionnal
On 20/05/2024 11:55, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:I'm not sure about that, I don't have the MT8365 datasheet...
Il 18/05/24 23:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:So there are two syscfg blocks? With exactly the same set of registers
SoCs should use dedicated compatibles for each of their syscon nodes toTechnically, that's not a SCPSYS block, but called SYSCFG in MT8365, but the
precisely describe the block. Using an incorrect compatible does not
allow to properly match/validate children of the syscon device. Replace
SYSCFG compatible, which does not have children, with a new dedicated
one for SCPSYS block.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
meaning and the functioning is the same, so it's fine for me.
or different?
Adding Alexandre to the loop - I think he can clarify as he should have the
required documentation.
specification, it seems to have only one block.
I don't have the history why SYSCFG instead of SCPSYS.
I've tested your serie and have a regression at the kernel boot time:
[ 7.738117] mtk-power-controller 10006000.syscon:power-controller: Failed to create device link
(0x180) with 14000000.syscon
It's related to your patch 3/4.
different node - mmsys. No driver binds to 10006000.syscon, except the
MFD syscon of course, so my change should have zero effect on drivers.
The mtk-pm-domains (so child of patch affected in 3/4) only takes regmap
from the parent, so the cells again are not related.
Just to be sure: you are testing mainline or next, without any other
patches on top except mine?