On Wed 24 Sep 09:39 PDT 2014, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2014, at 6:25 PM, Bjorn Andersson <Bjorn.Andersson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [..] > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-rpm.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom-rpm.txt [..] > > +- qcom,ipc: > > + Usage: required > > + Value type: <prop-encoded-array> > > + > > + Definition: three entries specifying the outgoing ipc bit used for > > + signaling the RPM: > > + - phandle to a syscon node representing the apcs registers > > + - u32 representing offset to the register within the syscon > > + - u32 representing the ipc bit within the register > > + > > Does this really ever differ for the SoCs, and even if it does why do we need > to encode it in DT. Can’t we determine it via the compatible setting? > The two offsets could be hard coded, especially based on the compatible. But I don't know if it's worth respinning this just to get those two number out of here. Also this is now "symmetric" with the smd use cases, where it shouldn't be hard coded. Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
