[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56A1FC5D.5040506@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:24:37 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] rtc: max77686: Add max77802 support
On Friday 22 January 2016 01:53 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> The MAX77686 and MAX77802 RTC IP blocks are very similar with only
> these differences:
>
> 0) The RTC registers layout and addresses are different.
>
> 1) The MAX77686 use 1 bit of the sec/min/hour/etc registers as the
> alarm enable while MAX77802 has a separate register for that.
>
> 2) The MAX77686 RTCYEAR register valid values range is 0..99 while
> for MAX77802 is 0..199.
>
> 3) The MAX77686 has a separate I2C address for the RTC registers
> while the MAX77802 uses the same I2C address as the PMIC regs.
>
> 5) The minimum delay before a RTC update (16 msecs vs 200 usecs).
>
> There are separate drivers for MAX77686 and MAX77802 RTC IP blocks
> but the differences are not that big so the driver can be extended
> to support both instead of duplicating a lot of code in 2 drivers.
>
> Suggested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
>
Acked-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists