On 7/2/2013 11:41 AM, Hebbar, Gururaja wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 11:39:28, Nori, Sekhar wrote: >> On 7/2/2013 11:34 AM, Hebbar, Gururaja wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 11:32:34, Nori, Sekhar wrote: >>>> On 6/28/2013 3:05 PM, Hebbar Gururaja wrote: >>>>> On some platforms (like AM33xx), a special register (RTC_IRQWAKEEN) >>>>> is available to enable Alarm Wakeup feature. This register needs to be >>>>> properly handled for the rtcwake to work properly. >>>>> >>>>> Platforms using such IP should set "ti,am3352-rtc" in rtc device dt >>>>> compatibility node. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Hebbar Gururaja <gururaja.hebbar@xxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Rob Landley <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: rtc-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> Cc: devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> Cc: linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>>> --- >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> -#define OMAP_RTC_DATA_DA830_IDX 1 >>>>> +#define OMAP_RTC_DATA_DA830_IDX 1 >>>>> +#define OMAP_RTC_DATA_AM335X_IDX 2 >>>>> >>>>> static struct platform_device_id omap_rtc_devtype[] = { >>>>> { >>>>> @@ -309,6 +321,9 @@ static struct platform_device_id omap_rtc_devtype[] = { >>>>> }, { >>>>> .name = "da830-rtc", >>>>> .driver_data = OMAP_RTC_HAS_KICKER, >>>>> + }, { >>>>> + .name = "am335x-rtc", >>>> >>>> may be use am3352-rtc here just to keep the platform device name and of >>>> compatible in sync. >>> >>> Correct. I will update the same in v2. >>> >>>> >>>>> + .driver_data = OMAP_RTC_HAS_KICKER | OMAP_RTC_HAS_IRQWAKEEN, >>>>> }, >>>>> {}, >>>> >>>> It is better to use the index defined above in the static initialization >>>> so they remain in sync. >>> >>> Sorry. I didn’t get this. >>> >> >> See example below I provided. If its still not clear, let me know what >> is not clear. >> >>>> ... >>>> [OMAP_RTC_DATA_DA830_IDX] = { >>>> .name = "da830-rtc", >>>> .driver_data = OMAP_RTC_HAS_KICKER, >>>> }, > > Thanks for the clarification. In this case will it ok if I update the previous > member also. You dont really reference [0] in omap_rtc_of_match[] so even if you leave it as-is, that's fine with me. I am mostly concerned with the index definitions and initialization order being out of sync and that's really not an issue with [0]. Thanks, Sekhar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html