2015-05-05 17:42 GMT+02:00 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> 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.
Thanks, I will prefix them with the proper namespace, Daniel proposal
is fine to me.
>
>> >> #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.
Ok good. Let's see what DT maintainers thinks about that.
Regards,
Maxime
>
> regards
> Philipp
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
