[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdY88Zdp2zqabWPfYPnTwSzYuCqSQHQg9vF_+Zd=TFOvaA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 10:43:29 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, masahiroy@...nel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [DT Question] "simple-mfd" DT binding
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 3:29 AM, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
> Because "simple-bus" indicates that child nodes are
> simply memory mapped, but the node "register-bit-led"
> can not be memory-mapped.
> So, "simple-mfd" can not be replaced "simple-bus" here.
Yeah... just like Lee points out, you are spot on, this is exactly
the reason why we created "simple-mfd" in the first place
IIRC.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists