Am Dienstag, den 05.05.2015, 17:19 +0200 schrieb Maxime Coquelin:
> >> For example, includes/dt-bindings/mfd/stm32f4-rcc.h would look like:
> >>
> >> #define GPIOA 0
> >> #define GPIOB 1
> >> ...
> >> #define LTDC 186
That looks a bit fragile.
At least the defines for the indices should be properly namespaced,
check out include/dt-bindings/gpio/tegra-gpio.h for a similar case.
> >> #define STM32F4_RESET(x) (x + 128)
> >> #define STM32F4_CLOCK(x) (x + 384)
> >>
> >> Then, in DT, a reset would be described like this:
> >>
> >> timer2 {
> >> resets = <&rcc STM32F4_RESET(TIM2)>;
> >> };
> >>
> >> Phillip, Daniel, does that look acceptable to you?
> >
> >
> > Doesn't look unreasonable.
> >
> > I am a little uneasy simply because there are very few similar header files
> > in that directory but I haven't thought of a better idea.
>
> Since this file will be shared by both clock and reset drivers, I
> don't see better option.
> I will implement it in v8 if Philipp agrees.
Are the device tree maintainers happy with this idiom spreading?
Except for the point above, I think this is acceptable.
regards
Philipp
--
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
