On 04/16/2013 08:31 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Add of_device_id table for Palma GPIO to be enable the
> driver from DT file.
>
> The driver can be registered from DT file as:
> palmas: tps65913@58 {
> :::::::::::
> palmas_gpio: palmas_gpio {
> compatible = "ti,palmas-gpio";
> gpio-controller;
> #gpio-cells = <2>;
> };
> };
So I think this patch looks fine if everyone is agreed that all the
Palmas sub-modules are represented as explicit child nodes in DT, and
the probing of the child nodes is based on the top-level Palmas device
being a bus, and enumerating its children in standard DT style, using
compatible values. (I'm not sure how the child probing/instantiation
will work for non-DT systems though).
I'm not 100% sure if an agreement on the top-level structure of the
Palmas DT bindings was reached though? Can the SlimLogic people confirm
this? I assume Laxman must be OK with it since he's sending this patch?
It might be a good idea to get the final Palmas binding documentation
reviewed and checked in before changing the drivers/.dts files to match
what the final bindings might be.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
