On 21/03/2019 17:51:26+0800, Yingjoe Chen wrote:
>
> 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.
>
I agree, this would be better.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
