Hi Mason,
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 5:17 AM Mason Yang <masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Document the bindings used by the Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mason Yang <masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
> +Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF controller Device Tree Bindings
> +----------------------------------------------------------
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: should be "renesas,r8a77995-rpc"
Would it make sense to have a family-specific fallback "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc",
bseides the SoC-specific compatible value?
</masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx></masonccyang@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> +- #address-cells: should be 1
> +- #size-cells: should be 0
> +- reg: should contain 2 entries, one for the registers and one for the direct
> + mapping area
> +- reg-names: should contain "regs" and "dirmap"
> +- clock-names: should contain "rpc"
> +- clocks: should contain 1 entries for the module's clock
Doesn't the driver have a need to access the RPCD2 clock?
At least on R-Car V3M, it needs to program the Divider Clock Register
(DIVREG).
> +- renesas,rpc-mode: should contain "spi" for rpc spi mode or
> + "hyperflash" for rpc hyperflash mode.
Can't this be derived from the flash subnode?
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
