Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 31 Jul 2014 11:58:53 +0300 | From | Stanimir Varbanov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] mfd: pm8xxx-spmi: document DT bindings for Qualcomm SPMI PMICs |
| |
On 07/30/2014 01:23 AM, David Collins wrote: > On 07/24/2014 05:45 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote: >> Document DT bindings used to describe the Qualcomm SPMI PMICs. >> Currently the SPMI PMICs supported are pm8941, pm8841 and pma8084. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@mm-sol.com> > > (...) >> +Required properties for peripheral child nodes: >> +- compatible: Should contain "qcom,pm8xxx-xxx", where "xxx" is >> + peripheral name. The "pm8xxx" can be any of supported PMICs, >> + see example below. > > I don't think that this binding document should be imposing any formatting > restrictions on the compatible strings for QPNP peripheral drivers. The > QPNP peripheral drivers in the downstream msm-3.10 tree [1] do not specify > per-PMIC compatible strings. This is because ideally, a given QPNP > peripheral represents a hardware block that is identical in interface and > operation between PMICs. >
Isn't "hardware block that is identical in interface and operation between PMICs" exactly the meaning of *compatible* property?
No *compatible* property, no platform device. We must have this property for every peripheral driver.
> These peripheral drivers determine the base address for a given device > instance via device tree reg and reg-names properties. In order for this > to continue to work with the pm8xxx-spmi driver, some mechanism will need > to be introduced which creates resource structs for the > non-memory-mappable SPMI base addresses. One possible solution is > currently being discussed in another thread [2]. This document will need > to be updated to show the child node reg property scheme once a solution > is reached. >
That's correct. If we reach the "reg" solution this binding document must be changed.
> (...) >> +Example: >> + >> + pm8941@0 { >> + compatible = "qcom,pm8941"; >> + reg = <0x0 SPMI_USID>; >> + >> + rtc { >> + compatible = "qcom,pm8941-rtc"; >> + interrupts = <0x0 0x61 0x1 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; >> + interrupt-names = "alarm"; >> + }; >> + }; > > Can you please expand your example to include the second SID for the > PM8941 chip? That way, it will be clear that each PMIC needs two DT > nodes; one for each SID.
Sure, will do.
-- regards, Stan
| |