> The AMS AS3722 is a compact system PMU suitable for mobile phones,
> tablets etc. It has 4 DC/DC step-down regulators, 3 DC/DC step-down
> controller, 11 LDOs, RTC, automatic battery, temperature and
> over-current monitoring, 8 GPIOs, ADC and wathdog.
>
> Add mfd core driver for the AS3722 to support core functionality.
<snip>
> +Example:
> +--------
> +ams3722 {
> + compatible = "ams,as3722";
> + reg = <0x48>
> +
> + interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +
> + gpio-controller;
> + #gpio-cells = <2>;
> +
> + gpio {
> + /*
> + * GPIO related properties
> + * Refer document bindings/gpio/gpio-as3722.txt
> + */
> + };
> +
> + regulators {
> + /*
> + * Regulator related properties
> + * Refer document bindings/regulator/as3722-regulator.txt
> + */
> + };
> +};
I still don't think this is the way to go. If you can justify that
these sub-devices require their own node, then they should have a
compatible string. The MFD sub-system will then populate the of_node
for you and you can use/request them in the normal way.
To reiterate, Mark's issue was not the existence of the compatible
string, it was with the existence of the child nodes in general.
Personally I think the device should have sub-nodes. It's how we
dealt with our DB8500 and AB8500 and it works very well. At the end of
the day these all-in-one chips do house very different devices. I see
no harm in describing them that way. I'm sure other OSes can make use
of the sub-devices in similar ways.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
