Re: [PATCH v2 13/21] DT: omap4/5: add binding for the wake-up generator

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2015-01-08 16:52, Nishanth Menon wrote:
On 17:42-20150107, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
---
.../interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..16149d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu
@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
+TI OMAP4 Wake-up Generator
+
+All TI OMAP4/5 (and their derivatives) an interrupt controllerthat
controller that
+routes interrupts to the GIC, and also serves as a wakeup source. It
+is also refered to as "WUGEN-MPU", hence the name of the binding.
+
+Reguired properties:
+
+- compatible : should contain at least "ti,omap4-wugen-mpu"
Could we also document ti,omap5-wugen-mpu. In addition, if you could
make this patch prior to patch #12, it helps the checkpatch at the very
least ;)

Sure.

also saw a few checkpatch warnings:
+WARNING: 'refered' may be misspelled - perhaps 'referred'?
+#22: FILE:

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu:5:
++is also refered to as "WUGEN-MPU", hence the name of the binding.
+WARNING: 'explicitely' may be misspelled - perhaps 'explicitly'?
+#39: FILE:

Documentation/devicetree/bindings/interrupt-controller/ti,omap4-wugen-mpu:22:
++  are explicitely forbiden.

+- reg : Specifies base physical address and size of the registers.
+- interrupt-controller : Identifies the node as an interrupt controller. +- #interrupt-cells : Specifies the number of cells needed to encode an
+  interrupt source. The value must be 3.
+- interrupt-parent : a phandle to the GIC these interrupts are routed
+  to.
+
+Notes:
+
+- Because this HW ultimately routes interrupts to the GIC, the
+  interrupt specifier must be that of the GIC.
+- Only SPIs can use the ictlr as an interrupt parent. SGIs and PPIs

I think you mean interrupt controller and not nvidia ictlr here.. :)

-ECOPYPASTE... ;-)

Thanks,

         M.
--
Fast, cheap, reliable. Pick two.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC Development]     [Linux Rockchip Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux