> Add DT bindings for TPS65218 PMIC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@xxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/tps65218.txt | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++
> .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt | 22 ++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 49 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/tps65218.txt
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/tps65218.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/tps65218.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..87cb7a8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/tps65218.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
> +The TPS65218 Integrated Power Management Chips.
> +These chips are connected to an i2c bus.
I2C
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible : Must be "ti,tps65218";
> +- interrupts : This i2c device has an IRQ line connected to the main SoC
I2C
> +- interrupt-controller : Since the tps65218 support several interrupts
support(s) (hosts?)
> + internally, it is considered as an interrupt controller cascaded to the SoC.
> +- #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +- interrupt-parent : The parent interrupt controller.
Phandle to ...
> +Optional node:
node(s):
> +- Child nodes contain in the tps65218.
> + It supports a number of features.
Please re-phase the above two sentences to something decipherable.
> + The children nodes will thus depend of the capability of the variant.
Please, go on ...
> +Example:
> +/*
> + * Integrated Power Management Chip
> + */
> +tps@24 {
> + compatible = "ti,tps65218";
> + reg = <0x24>;
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> + interrupt-parent = <&gic>;
> +};
Perhaps it would be better to centralise the documentation inclusive
of the regulator contingent. Or at least provide a _full_ example in
each document.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..1ccf170
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> +TPS65218 family of regulators
> +
> +Required properties:
> +For tps65218 regulators/LDOs
> +- compatible:
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc1" for DCDC1
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc2" for DCDC2
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc3" for DCDC3
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc4" for DCDC4
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc5" for DCDC5
> + - "ti,tps65218-dcdc6" for DCDC6
> + - "ti,tps65218-ldo1" for LDO1 LDO
Why aren't you using 'regulator-compatible'?
> +Optional properties:
> +- Any optional property defined in bindings/regulator/regulator.txt
> +
> +Example:
> + xyz: regulator@0 {
Genuine question: Is the @0 meaningful?
> + compatible = "ti,tps65218-dcdc1";
> + regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>;
> + regulator-max-microvolt = <3000000>;
> + };
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
