On Tue, May 02, 2023 at 10:02:27AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 01/05/2023 08:47, Mathew McBride wrote: > > Add the Ten64 family board controller[1] to the trivial devices list. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mathew McBride <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > [1] - https://ten64doc.traverse.com.au/hardware/microcontroller/ Nothing at that link... > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml > > index 246863a9bc7e..638e16fc9f71 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/trivial-devices.yaml > > @@ -397,6 +397,8 @@ properties: > > - ti,tps544b25 > > - ti,tps544c20 > > - ti,tps544c25 > > + # Board controller for Ten64 family mainboards > > + - traverse,ten64-controller > > This is not a ten64 device, but just component of the SoC, right? > Regular NXP LPC804 Cortex-M0 which you just program with different firmware. > > Basically this means you describe the firmware in Devicetree... > > Rob, > > What are the guidelines for generic co-processors (some Cortex-M) > exposing just I2C line and nothing more? Do we want to describe the > actual firmware running there? It really depends if the firmware implements a fixed function or varies frequently. If there's resources exposed in DT dependent on the firmware, then the binding kind of has to be a binding for the firmware. DT is the view of hardware as presented to the OS whether the h/w is implemented in gates or firmware. Rob
