Hi Rob, On 22/01/2019 at 02:07, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:57:38AM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote: >> Update the Reset Controller's binding to add new SoC compatibility string. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-sysregs.txt | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-sysregs.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-sysregs.txt >> index 36952cc39993..badce6ef3ab3 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-sysregs.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/atmel-sysregs.txt >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ Its subnodes can be: >> RSTC Reset Controller required properties: >> - compatible: Should be "atmel,<chip>-rstc". >> <chip> can be "at91sam9260", "at91sam9g45", "sama5d3" or "samx7" >> + it also can be "microchip,sam9x60-rstc" > > How is this related to at91sam9260-rstc? at91sam9260 and sam9x60 are completely different products (they share the same core though...). I know the naming could be misleading but it is like it is... > The 'x' is a wildcard? We generally avoid wildcards. Here, the 'x' is definitively not a wildcard nor a kind of "family" name, it's included in the (upcoming) single product's name. I hope it clarifies. Best regards, Nicolas >> - reg: Should contain registers location and length >> - clocks: phandle to input clock. >> >> -- >> 2.17.1 >> > -- Nicolas Ferre
