> -----Original Message----- > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:32 AM > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534 <dongsheng.w...@freescale.com> > Cc: devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > robh...@kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Wang Huan- > B18965 <alison.w...@freescale.com>; Jin Zhengxiong-R64188 > <jason....@freescale.com>; Zhao Chenhui-B35336 > <chenhui.z...@freescale.com>; Tang Yuantian-B29983 > <yuantian.t...@freescale.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 21:30 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 10:19 AM > > > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534 > > > Cc: devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > > > robh...@kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Wang Huan- > > > B18965; Jin > > > Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336; Tang Yuantian-B29983 > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM > > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 21:15 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote: > > > > Hi Scott, > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 7:57 AM > > > > > To: Wang Dongsheng-B40534 > > > > > Cc: devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; > > > > > robh...@kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Wang > > > > > robh+Huan- > > > > > B18965; Jin > > > > > Zhengxiong-R64188; Zhao Chenhui-B35336; Tang Yuantian-B29983 > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 2015-09-15 at 16:55 +0800, Dongsheng Wang wrote: > > > > > > +* Freescale RCPM Wakeup Source Device Tree Bindings > > > > > > +------------------------------------------- > > > > > > +Required rcpm-wakeup property should be added to a device > > > > > > +node if the > > > > > > device > > > > > > +can be used as a wakeup source. > > > > > > + > > > > > > + - rcpm-wakeup: The value of the property consists of 3 cells. > > > > > > + The > > > > > > first > > > > > > cell > > > > > > + is a pointer to the rcpm node, the second cell is the > > > > > > + bit mask > > > > > > that > > > > > > + should be set in IPPDEXPCR0, and the last cell is for > > > > > > IPPDEXPCR1. > > > > > > + Note: If the platform has no IPPDEXPCR1 register, put a > > > > > > + zero > > > > > > here. > > > > > > > > > > What if a future platform has more than two of these registers? > > > > > > > > Those registers are only used for wakeup device, we have a lot of > > > > available bit for feature. For example, In LS1021a platform only > > > > 7bits has used in the registers, and 57bits is reserved. > > > > > > Still, it'd be better to for the rcpm node to advertise the number > > > of cells it expects. > > > > For the foreseeable future it should be enough to use, even if not > > enough to use in the future at that time we can update the binding. > > That's the whole point. Device tree is stable ABI. Updating it later to not > be > fixed to two cells would be a lot harder than getting it right from the > beginning. Putting the number of cells in the phandle target is a standard > device tree idiom. > I agree with you. But what's the point a SOC has more than 64 wakeup source?
Regards, Yuantian > -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
