[Adding Rob] On 22-06-15, 16:43, Lee Jones wrote: At least some description was required here on why you need additional bindings are what are they. Over that, this patch should have been present before any other patches using these bindings. > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-st.txt | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-st.txt > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-st.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-st.txt > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000..cfa8952 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-st.txt > @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ > +Binding for ST's CPUFreq driver > +=============================== OPP-v2 bindings are out now and you can probably use them to make life simple, they are part of Rafael's recent pull request: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/6/22/606 > +Required properties: > +------------------- > +- compatible : Supported values are: > + "st,stih407-cpufreq" Nodes for virtual devices aren't allowed in DT. > +Required properties [for working voltage scaling]: > +------------------------------------------------- > + > +Located in CPUFreq's node: > + > +- st,syscfg : Phandle to Major number register > + First cell: offset to major number > +- st,syscfg-eng : Phandle to Minor number and Pcode registers > + First cell: offset to process code > + Second cell: offset to minor number > + > +Located in CPU's node: > + > +- st,opp-list : Bootloader provided node containing one or more 'opp@X' sub-nodes I can see that this will be passed in from the bootloader. But at least an example on how exactly things would actually look would have been good. In logs if not in this file. -- viresh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
