[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8478b23e903d5236500ef2f6f7edb88f@walle.cc>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 14:07:23 +0100
From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Rafał Miłecki
<rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] dt-bindings: nvmem: layouts: add fixed-layout
Am 2023-03-09 12:39, schrieb Rafał Miłecki:
> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
>
> With the introduction of NVMEM layouts we should prefer and support
> describing all NVMEM devices content in the "nvmem-layout" node. That
> inludes using it for fixed NVMEM cells (those with hardcoded offset &
> size).
>
> This seems to be cleaner design and more explicit.
>
> Introduce a binding allowing fixed NVMEM cells as a type of layout. To
> avoid code duplication put shared part in the fixed-cell.yaml.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
I don't feel comfortable to add an acked-by or reviewed-by here
because I don't do much with dt-bindings myself, but this looks
good to me.
From a device tree binding POV, could there be a
nvmem-layout@0 {
reg = <0>;
compatible = "layout1";
};
nvmem-layout@...0 {
reg = <1000>;
compatible = "layout2";
};
for partitioned eeproms for example?
-michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists