On 01/12/2021 00:02, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 08:47:57PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 23/11/2021 11:26, Roger Quadros wrote: >>> AM64 SoC contains the GPMC module. Add compatible for it. >>> >>> Newer SoCs don't necessarily map GPMC data region at the same place >>> as legacy SoCs. Add reg-names "data", to provide this information to >>> the device driver. >>> >>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/memory-controllers/ti,gpmc.yaml | 12 +++++++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ti,gpmc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ti,gpmc.yaml >>> index 25b42d68f9b3..1869cc6f949b 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ti,gpmc.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/ti,gpmc.yaml >>> @@ -23,13 +23,20 @@ properties: >>> items: >>> - enum: >>> - ti,am3352-gpmc >>> + - ti,am64-gpmc >>> - ti,omap2420-gpmc >>> - ti,omap2430-gpmc >>> - ti,omap3430-gpmc >>> - ti,omap4430-gpmc >>> >>> reg: >>> - maxItems: 1 >>> + minItems: 1 >>> + maxItems: 2 >>> + >>> + reg-names: >>> + items: >>> + - const: cfg >>> + - const: data >> >> I see your driver handles cases with only one reg item, but I have other >> question - is it correct to have older (ARMv7) platform with two reg >> items? Or can am64-gpmc come with only one reg? >> IOW, I am surprised there is no if-else case precising this minItems >> requirement for different SocS. > > I don't think that is needed here. If the assumption is 'reg-names' is > only present when there are 2 entries, then it is fine. Maybe > 'reg-names' should be required for ti,am64-gpmc though. Yes, I'll make 'reg-names' property required for ti,am64-gpmc. cheers, -roger
