On 16.04.2019 4:06, masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Document the bindings used by the Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF MFD controller. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mason Yang <masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt | 37 +++++++++ > +++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd- > renesas-rpc.txt > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas- > rpc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000..bfb3d29 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt > > @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ > > +Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF MFD controller Device Tree Bindings > > +------------------------------------------------------------- > > + > > +Required properties: > > +- compatible: should be an SoC-specific compatible value, followed by > > + "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc" as a fallback. > > + supported SoC-specific values are: > > + "renesas,r8a77995-rpc" (R-Car D3) > > +- reg: should contain 2 entries, one for the base address of rpc- > if registers, > > + and one for the direct mapping area > > +- reg-names: should contain "regs", and "dirmap" > > The device tree describes the hardware, not the driver. Why did you remove > the "wbuf" area? I don't think we should describe the hardware that driver did not implement it because there are still many RPC registers we don't use them.
I have to repeat: we describe the hardware, not the driver capabilities.
best regards, Mason
MBR, Sergei
