Hi Marek, On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:35 AM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/12/2017 08:56 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On 10/10/2017 04:58 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>>> Add a device node for the ROHM BD9571MWV PMIC, based on the example in >>>> the DT binding documentation, but using INTC-EX instead. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> Do we need to describe more regulators? >>> >>> To my knowledge, no. >> >> OK, thanks! >> >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/salvator-common.dtsi >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/salvator-common.dtsi >>>> @@ -353,6 +353,30 @@ >>>> >>>> &i2c_dvfs { >>>> status = "okay"; >>>> + >>>> + pmic: pmic@30 { >>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&irq0_pins>; >>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>> + >>>> + compatible = "rohm,bd9571mwv"; >>>> + reg = <0x30>; >>>> + interrupt-parent = <&intc_ex>; >>> >>> Shouldn't this be gpio2 ? Why intc-ex ? >> >> Because we now have INTC-EX support ;-) >> >> Serious: if a pin used for interrupt signalling can be configured for both >> GPIO and INTC-EX aka IRQC, we typically configure it for INTC-EX. Probably >> because the latter is a simpler block, and thus consumes less power? > That should be in the commit message :) Does it? The schematics clearly mark the signal as IRQ0n, not GP2_00. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds