On Tuesday 16 December 2014 12:05:08 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:
> On 14-12-16 11:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 December 2014 11:22:30 arun.ramamurthy@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> + rtc: iproc_rtc@0x03026000 {
> >> + compatible = "brcm,iproc-rtc";
> >> + reg = spru_bbl: <0x03026000 0xC>,
> >> + crmu_pwr_good_status: <0x0301C02C 0x14>,
> >> + crmu_bbl_auth: <0x03024C74 0x8>;
> >> + interrupts = spru_rtc_periodic: <GIC_SPI 142 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> >> + spru_alarm: <GIC_SPI 133 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> >
> > The reg properties look really random, could it be that the registers
> > are really part of some other device that contains multiple functions?
> >
> This RTC block is on a battery backed logic island and is accessed
> indirectly using the spru_bbl registers. The CRMU registers are required
> to read the power status and write to some authentication registers.
> Without writing to these authentication
> registers, we cannot access any of the spru_bbl registers. In conclusion
> I don't think the CRMU register accesses can be considered as another
> device access. Do you agree Arnd?
It sounds like CRMU is some other unit aside from the RTC. Could this
be something like a generic system controller? I think it should
either have its own driver or use the syscon logic if that is what
this is.
> > Also, what do you use the labels for?
> >
> The labels are purely to improve readability of the device tree entry
Please remove them then, they don't help at all.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
