> On 09.09.2016, at 17:36, Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> Martin Sperl <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> hat am 9. September 2016 um 16:58
>> geschrieben:
>>
>>
>>
>>>> On 09.09.2016, at 16:25, Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 09.09.2016 um 09:49 schrieb kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>> From: Martin Sperl <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Add the node for the thermal sensor of the bcm2835-soc
>>>> to the device tree.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Martin Sperl <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi | 6 ++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi
>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi
>>>> index b982522..e2e3a46 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi
>>>> @@ -186,6 +186,12 @@
>>>> interrupts = <2 14>; /* pwa1 */
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> + thermal: thermal@0x7e212000 {
>>>> + compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-thermal";
>>>> + reg = <0x7e212000 0x8>;
>>>> + clocks = <&clocks BCM2835_CLOCK_TSENS>;
>>>> + };
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Since the driver handles 3 different SoC (2835, 2836, 2837). This node
>>> should be defined in the SoC specific dtsi files, because the BCM2836
>>> includes bcm283x.dtsi too.
>>>
>>> Be aware the patch for bcm2837 must go to ARM64.
>>
>> I can not really follow:
>> * the node is defined in the dtsi included by all 3 soc,
>> and it is available on all so it sits where for example
>> spi0 or uart0 is located
>> * as for arm64: this describes the registers that are
>> identical for arm and arm64 and the bcm2837.dtsi
>> is also including ../../../../arm/boot/dts/bcm283x.dtsi
>>
>> So what is the problem?
>
> The thermal driver specifies 3 different compatibles with partially different
> settings.
> If this patch is applied, all SoC (bcm2835, bcm2836, bcm2837) would use the
> bcm2835 settings.
> I can't believe this is intended.
>
> Why does the binding contains 3 different compatibles if only one is used?
Now I understand - did not think of that: good catch!
To minimize the patch: what about setting it to 2837 by default (in 283x.dtsi)
and only change compatible in 2835.dtsi and 2836.dtsi - that is 3 files
changed instead of 4 or 5...
Or any other ideas how to detect which Soc we run on during runtime?
I.e: query the root compatible string in the device-tree?
Just before I create a new patch set to fix that.
Martin
--
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
