On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 09:35:03AM +0200, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> >>>>> "Scott" == Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  Scott> #size-cells is zero on i2c, so it should just be reg = <68>.
> 
>  Scott> You'll probably need to add #address-cells and #size-cells to the
>  Scott> controller node, as well.

Uh.. yes.. i2c interfaces should really always have #a and #s.

> Ahh - Thanks. This should be better.
> ---
> 
> [PATCH] mpc8349emitx.dts: Add ds1339 RTC
> 
> Add ds1339 I2C RTC chip as child of 2nd I2C controller.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Korsgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8349emitx.dts |    9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: linux/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8349emitx.dts
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8349emitx.dts
> +++ linux/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8349emitx.dts
> @@ -62,12 +62,21 @@
>               };
>  
>               [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> +                     #address-cells = <1>;
> +                     #size-cells = <0>;
>                       device_type = "i2c";

Hrm... we probably want an "i2c" device_type class, but I don't think
we've actually defined one, which is a problem

>                       compatible = "fsl-i2c";
>                       reg = <3100 100>;
>                       interrupts = <f 8>;
>                       interrupt-parent = < &ipic >;
>                       dfsrr;
> +
> +                     [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> +                             device_type = "rtc";
> +                             compatible = "dallas,ds1339";
> +                             reg = <68>;
> +                     };

I think we want to think a bit more carefully about how to do bindings
for RTC devices.  No "rtc" device_type is defined, but again we might
want to.

I did find one real OF binding for a different Dallas RTC (and NVRAM),
see:

http://playground.sun.com/1275/proposals/Closed/Remanded/Accepted/346-it.txt

It's a little different from the example above.

The fact that NVRAM+RTC chips are so common is a bit of an issue from
the point of view of defining a device class binding - a device can't
have type "rtc" and "nvram".

> +
>               };
>  
>               [EMAIL PROTECTED] {
> 

-- 
David Gibson                    | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au  | minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
                                | _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to