lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 13:19:15 -0600 From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> Cc: p.zabel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>, Gregory Fong <gregory.0xf0@...il.com>, "maintainer:BROADCOM BCM7XXX ARM ARCHITECTURE" <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "moderated list:BROADCOM BCM7XXX ARM ARCHITECTURE" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: reset: Add document for Broadcom STB reset controller On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 10:53:25AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 1/3/19 9:41 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 05:34:08PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> Add a binding document for the Broadcom STB reset controller, also known > >> as SW_INIT-style reset controller. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> > >> --- > >> .../devicetree/bindings/reset/brcm,reset.txt | 27 +++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/brcm,reset.txt > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/brcm,reset.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/brcm,reset.txt > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..6e5341b4f891 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/brcm,reset.txt > >> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ > >> +Broadcom STB SW_INIT-style reset controller > >> +=========================================== > >> + > >> +Broadcom STB SoCs have a SW_INIT-style reset controller with separate > >> +SET/CLEAR/STATUS registers and possibly multiple banks, each of 32 bit > >> +reset lines. > >> + > >> +Please also refer to reset.txt in this directory for common reset > >> +controller binding usage. > >> + > >> +Required properties: > >> +- compatible: should be brcm,brcmstb-reset > >> +- reg: register base and length > >> +- #reset-cells: must be set to 1 > >> + > >> +Example: > >> + > >> + reset: reset-controller@...4318 { > >> + compatible = "brcm,brcmstb-reset"; > >> + reg = <0x8404318 0x30>; > > > > Based on this address, should this be a sub-node of something else? Or > > not even a sub-node and just make the parent be a reset provider? > > The reset controller is part of a larger "sundry" node which has a > collection of functionality, from pinmux/pinctrl, reset controller, > spare bits, chicken bits, anything the designers forgot to put somewhere > else and decided to put there. > > If there is one thing consistent though is that given a set of 32-bit > register groups, they have a self contained functionality such that you > can break up the larger "sundry" space into smaller sub-blocks which > have one an only one functionality. Do you think this warrants a > different representation in Device Tree? With pinctrl in the mix, you're going to need sub-nodes anyways. So just define what this is a sub-node of. Also, I'd prefer to have complete example for the "sundry" node and child nodes than partial examples spread across the tree. Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists