On 30/04/15 17:20, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
This adds documentation of device tree bindings for the
STM32 reset controller.
Tested-by: Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@xxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/reset/st,stm32-rcc.txt | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 107 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/st,stm32-rcc.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/st,stm32-rcc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/st,stm32-rcc.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c1b0f8d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/st,stm32-rcc.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+STMicroelectronics STM32 Peripheral Reset Controller
+====================================================
+
+The RCC IP is both a reset and a clock controller. This documentation only
+documents the reset part.
+
+Please also refer to reset.txt in this directory for common reset
+controller binding usage.
+
+Required properties:
+- compatible: Should be "st,stm32-rcc"
+- reg: should be register base and length as documented in the
+ datasheet
+- #reset-cells: 1, see below
+
+example:
+
+rcc: reset@40023800 {
+ #reset-cells = <1>;
+ compatible = "st,stm32-rcc";
Do you intend the clock driver to use the same compatible string (given
it is the same bit of hardware).
If so, is it better to use st,stm32f4-rcc here? It seems unlikey to me
that the register layout of the PLLs and dividers can be the same on the
f7 parts (and later).
+ reg = <0x40023800 0x400>;
+};
+
+Specifying softreset control of devices
+=======================================
+
+Device nodes should specify the reset channel required in their "resets"
+property, containing a phandle to the reset device node and an index specifying
+which channel to use.
+The index is the bit number within the RCC registers bank, starting from RCC
+base address.
+It is calculated as: index = register_offset / 4 * 32 + bit_offset.
+Where bit_offset is the bit offset within the register.
+For example, for CRC reset:
+ crc = AHB1RSTR_offset / 4 * 32 + CRCRST_bit_offset = 0x10 / 4 * 32 + 12 = 140
+
+example:
+
+ timer2 {
+ resets = <&rcc 256>;
+ };
+
+List of valid indices for STM32F429:
+ - gpioa: 128
+ - gpiob: 129
+ - gpioc: 130
+ - gpiod: 131
+ - gpioe: 132
+ - gpiof: 133
+ - gpiog: 134
+ - gpioh: 135
+ - gpioi: 136
+ - gpioj: 137
+ - gpiok: 138
+ - crc: 140
+ - dma1: 149
+ - dma2: 150
+ - dma2d: 151
+ - ethmac: 153
+ - otghs: 157
+ - dcmi: 160
+ - cryp: 164
+ - hash: 165
+ - rng: 166
+ - otgfs: 167
+ - fmc: 192
+ - tim2: 256
+ - tim3: 257
+ - tim4: 258
+ - tim5: 259
+ - tim6: 260
+ - tim7: 261
+ - tim12: 262
+ - tim13: 263
+ - tim14: 264
+ - wwdg: 267
+ - spi2: 270
+ - spi3: 271
+ - uart2: 273
+ - uart3: 274
+ - uart4: 275
+ - uart5: 276
+ - i2c1: 277
+ - i2c2: 278
+ - i2c3: 279
+ - can1: 281
+ - can2: 282
+ - pwr: 284
+ - dac: 285
+ - uart7: 286
+ - uart8: 287
+ - tim1: 288
+ - tim8: 289
+ - usart1: 292
+ - usart6: 293
+ - adc: 296
+ - sdio: 299
+ - spi1: 300
+ - spi4: 301
+ - syscfg: 302
+ - tim9: 304
+ - tim10: 305
+ - tim11: 306
+ - spi5: 308
+ - spi6: 309
+ - sai1: 310
+ - ltdc: 314
These numbers are stable for all STM32F4 family parts. Should this table
go into a dt-bindings header file?
--
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
