[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e4aaf8c3e8a54df2c5878f8e873e290f@crapouillou.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 15:57:11 +0200
From: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
Maarten ter Huurne <maarten@...ewalker.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux MIPS <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/14] MIPS: jz4740: DTS: Add nodes for ingenic pinctrl
and gpio drivers
Le 2017-04-07 11:44, Linus Walleij a écrit :
> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
> wrote:
>
>> For a description of the pinctrl devicetree node, please read
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ingenic,pinctrl.txt
>>
>> For a description of the gpio devicetree nodes, please read
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/ingenic,gpio.txt
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
>> ---
>> arch/mips/boot/dts/ingenic/jz4740.dtsi | 61
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> v2: Changed the devicetree bindings to match the new driver
>> v3: No changes
>> v4: Update the bindings for the v4 version of the drivers
> (...)
>
>> + pinctrl: ingenic-pinctrl@...10000 {
>> + compatible = "ingenic,jz4740-pinctrl";
>> + reg = <0x10010000 0x400>;
>> +
>> + gpa: gpio-controller@0 {
>> + compatible = "ingenic,gpio-bank-a",
>> "ingenic,jz4740-gpio";
>
> As Sergei and Rob notes, the bank compatible properties look
> a bit strange. Especially if they are all the same essentially.
>
> I like Sergei's idea to simply use the reg property if what you want
> is really a unique ID number. What do you think about this?
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
I think the 'reg' property makes more sense, yes. I'll fix this in the
v5, this
week-end. Do you think it can go in 4.12?
Thanks,
-Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists