[PATCH v1 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: Add NPCM reset status support

[Tomer Maimon]

On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 at 09:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:

> On 17/02/2026 07:53, Tomer Maimon wrote:
> > On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 at 20:03, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 04:59:18PM +0200, Tomer Maimon wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 16 Feb 2026 at 16:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> +  syscon:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> First iteration. See "How to Get Your DT Schema Bindings Accepted
> >> in
> >>>>>>>> Less Than 10 Iterations"
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks, it was very helpful.
> >>>>>>> the syscon property is already found in the WD node
> >>>>>>> in nuvoton-common-npcm8xx.dtsi file, what should I do:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How is that file related to this binding?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Either you document existing ABI or you add new (for new device).
> >> Commit
> >>>>>> msg MUST be explicit about it and provide the reasons. If wrong
> >> (e.g.
> >>>>>> discouraged) ABI was already used then it depends how and when it
> >> got
> >>>>>> into the kernel, e.g. if someone bypassed DT completely just to get
> >> it
> >>>>>> inside.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> The syscon property is already used in the upstream NPCM8xx DTSI
> >> watchdog
> >>>>> node, so I will document it as existing ABI and mark it deprecated. I
> >>>> will
> >>>>
> >>>> And how it is used? I cannot find its usage, so I do not agree on
> >>>> documenting it. Property should be removed or at least provide the
> >>>> justification/impact of removal, if you need it to stay.
> >>>>
> >>>> Understood. The syscon phandle is used by the watchdog driver to read
> >> and
> >>
> >> You messed up quotes.
> >>
> >> Can you point me to the line? I REALLY want to be sure that we are not
> >> wasting each other time, e.g. me looking at wrong code or you telling me
> >> some bollocks from downstream.
> >>
> > The syscon property is not used in the current upstream npcm_wdt driver.
> > It is used *in this patch set*, which introduces the function
>
> Why would that matter for the ABI?
>
> So no, your buggy DTS sneaked into the kernel before submitting bindings
> is not acceptable thus ABI which was NEVER reviewed must be removed.

It will be removed from the DTSI.
I’ll send a new patch set that adds proper reset‑indication support using a
new nuvoton,sysgcr phandle.

>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>

Best regards,

Tomer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/attachments/20260217/1c49345a/attachment.htm>