[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151202125325.GI1929@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 12:53:25 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] regulator: Add brcm,bcm63xx-regulator device tree
binding
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 12:45:50PM -0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
> On Tue, December 1, 2015 22:16, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Why are these in the DT, I would expect that if this is a driver for a
> > specific SoC all these properties would be known as a result of that.
> This is a driver for multiple SoCs with the same regulator control in
> different places on different SoCs, so the location of it within the misc
> register needs to be provided in the DT:
> BCM6362:
> #define MISC_BASE 0xb0001800 /* Miscellaneous Registers */
> uint32 miscIddqCtrl; /* 0x48 */
This is the sort of thing you can pick up from the SoC compatible
strings. As things stand there is zero content in this driver that
relates to this SoC.
> The mask is used as there's one bit per regulator in the register, but
> there's more than one way to express this in the DT:
I wouldn't expect to see it in the device tree at all for a device
specific driver.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists