Am Montag, 23. Januar 2017, 16:40:46 CET schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 07:14:45PM +0300, Alexander Kochetkov wrote:
> > Property set to '"rockchip,rk3228-timer", "rockchip,rk3288-timer"'
> > to match devicetree bindings.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Kochetkov <al.kochet@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3228-evb.dts | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3228-evb.dts
> > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3228-evb.dts index 904668e..38eab87 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3228-evb.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3228-evb.dts
> > @@ -70,3 +70,7 @@
> >
> > &uart2 {
> >
> > status = "okay";
> >
> > };
> >
> > +
> > +&timer {
> > + compatible = "rockchip,rk3228-timer", "rockchip,rk3288-timer";
> > +};
>
> I'm not sure this is correct, to which timer &timer will refer ?
>
> timer {
> compatible = "arm,armv7-timer";
> ...
> }
>
> timer: timer@110c0000 {
> compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-timer";
> ...
> }
>
> Why not change the compatible string in the timer definition in rk322x.dtsi
> ?
>
> Same comment for the other patches doing these changes.
I think Alexander didn't know which timer name to use.
Both the rk3228 and rk3229 are so similar that so far no-one has seen any
difference and thus they really share the whole rk322x.dtsi file.
On the other hand compatibles are supposed to be explicit, so a rk322x-timer
compatible is not allowed.
But as the socs are soooo similar, I'd suggest just using the rk3228-timer
compatible in the rk322x.dtsi and not changing individual board files.
Similar to what Daniel suggested.
Heiko
--
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
