lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [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


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-07-31 11:41    [W:2.489 / U:0.032 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site