[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6937937.4J6iI7VpBO@wuerfel>
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:44:32 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@...com>, dbaryshkov@...il.com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, pawel.moll@....com,
mark.rutland@....com, ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk,
galak@...eaurora.org, santosh.shilimkar@...com,
grant.likely@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
grygorii.strashko@...com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, w-kwok2@...com, rdunlap@...radead.org,
sboyd@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, olof@...om.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] Power: reset: add bindings for keystone reset driver
On Monday 14 April 2014 20:41:20 Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote:
> +Optional properties:
> +
> +- ti,soft-reset: Boolean option indicating soft reset.
> + By default hard reset is used.
> +
> +- ti,wdt_list: WDT list that can cause SoC reset.
> + The list in format: <0>, <2>;
> + Begins from 0 to 3, as keystone can contain up
> + to 4 SoC reset watchdogs.
>
This looks like your binding just describes a subset of the
watchdog timer registers. If so, don't do a standalone reset
driver, but instead do a watchdog driver that can also be
used for reset, and have a binding that properly describes
the watchdog hardware.
It is bad to have overlapping register ranges between logical
devices, and it's also generally wrong to describe devices that
are not actually there: The hardware contains a watchdog, not
a system-reset device, so you should not make one up because
it seems easier given the Linux driver model.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists