Hi,
Should use 'rtc: mt6397: ' as prefix for this patch.
On Mon, 2019-03-11 at 11:46 +0800, Hsin-Hsiung Wang wrote:
> From: Ran Bi <ran.bi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This add support for the MediaTek MT6358 RTC. MT6397 mfd will pass
> RTC_WRTGR address offset to RTC driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ran Bi <ran.bi@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> index f85f1fc..c8a0090 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c
> @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
> #define RTC_BBPU 0x0000
> #define RTC_BBPU_CBUSY BIT(6)
>
> -#define RTC_WRTGR 0x003c
> +#define RTC_WRTGR_DEFAULT 0x003c
>
> #define RTC_IRQ_STA 0x0002
> #define RTC_IRQ_STA_AL BIT(0)
> @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct mt6397_rtc {
> struct regmap *regmap;
> int irq;
> u32 addr_base;
> + u32 wrtgr_offset;
> };
>
> static int mtk_rtc_write_trigger(struct mt6397_rtc *rtc)
> @@ -86,7 +87,8 @@ static int mtk_rtc_write_trigger(struct mt6397_rtc *rtc)
> int ret;
> u32 data;
>
> - ret = regmap_write(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_WRTGR, 1);
> + ret = regmap_write(rtc->regmap,
> + rtc->addr_base + rtc->wrtgr_offset, 1);
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> @@ -341,6 +343,15 @@ static int mtk_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> rtc->addr_base = res->start;
>
> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_REG, 0);
> + if (res) {
> + rtc->wrtgr_offset = res->start;
> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "register offset:%d\n", rtc->wrtgr_offset);
> + } else {
> + rtc->wrtgr_offset = RTC_WRTGR_DEFAULT;
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get register offset\n");
> + }
> +
Since this will be passed by MFD, do we still need to keep the DEFAULT?
Any case this platform_get_resource will failed?
It's too bad HW changed this offset, but I'm not sure about passing this
information from MFD. We have 1 register that have different offset now,
and might have others for future chips, adding each one by
IORESOURCE_IRQ doesn't looks like a good solution. Keeping this
information in RTC driver only also looks better.
Joe.C
