lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] mfd: syscon: add child device support
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> For devices which have a complete register for themselves, it is possible to
> place them next to the syscon device with overlapping reg ranges. The same is

We want to avoid overlapping ranges.

> not possible for devices which only occupy bitfields in registers shared with
> other users.

You are addressing the latter case here?

> For devices that are completely controlled by bitfields in the syscon address
> range, such as multiplexers or voltage regulators, allow to put child devices
> into the syscon device node.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.txt | 11 +++++++++++
> drivers/mfd/syscon.c | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.txt
> index fe8150b..a7e11d5 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/syscon.txt
> @@ -9,10 +9,21 @@ using a specific compatible value), interrogate the node (or associated
> OS driver) to determine the location of the registers, and access the
> registers directly.
>
> +Optionally, devices that are only controlled through single syscon
> +registers or bitfields can also be added as child nodes to the syscon
> +device node. These devices can implicitly assume their parent node
> +as syscon provider without referencing it explicitly via phandle.
> +In this case, the syscon node should have #address-cells = <1> and
> +#size-cells = <0> and no ranges property.
> +

I'd like to see an example. What does reg in the child contain? The
register address?

What if the child device needs 3 bitfields from 3 different registers?
It seems to me that you could then want to describe every single
bitfield of a block in the DT. That seems like too much information in
DT much like trying to describe every single clock in DT.

Rob


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-17 20:21    [W:0.082 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site