Hi Philipp,

2015-02-13 12:47 GMT+01:00 Philipp Zabel [off-list ref]:

Hi Maxime,

Am Donnerstag, den 12.02.2015, 18:46 +0100 schrieb Maxime Coquelin:
[...]

quoted

+     soc {
+             reset_ahb1: reset@40023810 {
+                     #reset-cells = <1>;
+                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
+                     reg = <0x40023810 0x4>;
+             };
+
+             reset_ahb2: reset@40023814 {
+                     #reset-cells = <1>;
+                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
+                     reg = <0x40023814 0x4>;
+             };
+
+             reset_ahb3: reset@40023818 {
+                     #reset-cells = <1>;
+                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
+                     reg = <0x40023818 0x4>;
+             };
+
+             reset_apb1: reset@40023820 {
+                     #reset-cells = <1>;
+                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
+                     reg = <0x40023820 0x4>;
+             };
+
+             reset_apb2: reset@40023824 {
+                     #reset-cells = <1>;
+                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
+                     reg = <0x40023824 0x4>;
+             };

These are mostly consecutive, single registers. I wonder if these are
part of the same IP block and thus should be grouped together into the
same reset controller node?

What I could to is to have two instances. One for AHB and one for APB domain.
Doing this, I will have one instance per domain, and only consecutive registers.
Is it fine for you?

Thanks,
Maxime

regards
Philipp