[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ebcfd49d-f810-4d9b-8cba-b55071fc7fa6@linaro.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2024 09:26:18 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
monstr@...str.eu, michal.simek@...inx.com, git@...inx.com
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/ZYNQ ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: rtc: zynqmp: Describe power-domains property
On 16/02/2024 10:42, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 2/16/24 10:19, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2024 09:51, Michal Simek wrote:
>>> RTC has its own power domain on Xilinx Versal SOC that's why describe it as
>>> optional property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>
>> But Versal is not described in this binding, is it? I see only one
>> compatible.
>
> It is the same IP only as is on zynqmp with own power rail.
Then you should have separate compatible, because they are not
identical. It would also allow you to narrow the domains to versal and
also require it (on versal).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists