Hi Prabhakar, On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 2:32 PM Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 1:25 PM Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2024 9:50 PM > > > Subject: [PATCH v2 6/8] arm64: dts: renesas: r9a09g057: Add WDT0-WDT3 nodes > > > > > > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Add WDT0-WDT3 nodes to RZ/V2H(P) ("R9A09G057") SoC DTSI. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > v1->v2 > > > - New patch > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi > > > index 435b1f4e7d38..7f4e8ad9b0a5 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi > > > @@ -184,6 +184,17 @@ scif: serial@11c01400 { > > > status = "disabled"; > > > }; > > > > > > + wdt0: watchdog@11c00400 { > > > + compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-wdt"; > > > + reg = <0 0x11c00400 0 0x400>; > > > + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 75>, > > > + <&cpg CPG_MOD 76>; > > > + clock-names = "pclk", "oscclk"; > > > + resets = <&cpg 117>; > > > + power-domains = <&cpg>; > > > + status = "disabled"; > > > + }; > > > + > > > ostm4: timer@12c00000 { > > > compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-ostm", "renesas,ostm"; > > > reg = <0x0 0x12c00000 0x0 0x1000>; > > > @@ -224,6 +235,28 @@ ostm7: timer@12c03000 { > > > status = "disabled"; > > > }; > > > > > > + wdt2: watchdog@13000000 { > > > + compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-wdt"; > > > + reg = <0 0x13000000 0 0x400>; > > > + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 79>, > > > + <&cpg CPG_MOD 80>; > > > + clock-names = "pclk", "oscclk"; > > > + resets = <&cpg 119>; > > > + power-domains = <&cpg>; > > > + status = "disabled"; > > > + }; > > > > I guess same group(all wdt together) arranged together?? Not sure. > > > I think Geert prefers it to be sorted based on unit address. So I'll > let Geert make a decision on this (and the rest of the similar patches > where nodes are sorted based on unit address and not grouped based on > IP). Sorted based on unit-address, but keep all nodes of the same type together. I.e.: wdt0: watchdog@11c00400 { ... }; wdt2: watchdog@13000000 { ... }; wdt3: watchdog@13000400 { ... }; wdt1: watchdog@14400000 { ... }; Thanks! 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