Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 05/15] dt-bindings: Document the STM32 reset bindings | From | Philipp Zabel <> | Date | Mon, 04 May 2015 12:28:40 +0200 |
| |
Am Samstag, den 02.05.2015, 11:01 +0100 schrieb Daniel Thompson: > On 02/05/15 08:55, Maxime Coquelin wrote: > > 2015-05-01 10:08 GMT+02:00 Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>: [...] > >> Do you intend the clock driver to use the same compatible string (given it > >> is the same bit of hardware). > >> > >> If so, is it better to use st,stm32f4-rcc here? It seems unlikey to me that > >> the register layout of the PLLs and dividers can be the same on the f7 parts > >> (and later). > > > > I agree we need a compatible dedicate to f4 series for clocks, and > > maybe even one for f429 (to be checked). > > For the reset part, we don't have this need. > > > > So either we use only "st,stm32f4" as you suggest, or we can have both > > in device tree: > > > > rcc: reset@40023800 { > > #reset-cells = <1>; > > compatible = "st,stm32f4-rcc", "st,stm32-rcc"; > > reg = <0x40023800 0x400>; > > }; > > > > What do you think? > > Having both makes sense. The reset driver probably doesn't care about > differences between F4 and F7 (I know very little about F7 but I can't > think of any obvious h/ware evolution that would confuse the current > reset driver).
Seconded, this is exactly the way compatible string lists are supposed to be used.
[...]
regards Philipp
| |