On 07/24/2014 05:45 AM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:

Document DT bindings used to describe the Qualcomm SPMI PMICs.
Currently the SPMI PMICs supported are pm8941, pm8841 and pma8084.

Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <redacted>

(...)

+Required properties for peripheral child nodes:
+- compatible:      Should contain "qcom,pm8xxx-xxx", where "xxx" is
+                   peripheral name. The "pm8xxx" can be any of supported PMICs,
+                   see example below.

I don't think that this binding document should be imposing any formatting
restrictions on the compatible strings for QPNP peripheral drivers.  The
QPNP peripheral drivers in the downstream msm-3.10 tree [1] do not specify
per-PMIC compatible strings.  This is because ideally, a given QPNP
peripheral represents a hardware block that is identical in interface and
operation between PMICs.

These peripheral drivers determine the base address for a given device
instance via device tree reg and reg-names properties.  In order for this
to continue to work with the pm8xxx-spmi driver, some mechanism will need
to be introduced which creates resource structs for the
non-memory-mappable SPMI base addresses.  One possible solution is
currently being discussed in another thread [2].  This document will need
to be updated to show the child node reg property scheme once a solution
is reached.

(...)

+Example:
+
+	pm8941 at 0 {
+		compatible = "qcom,pm8941";
+		reg = <0x0 SPMI_USID>;
+
+		rtc {
+			compatible = "qcom,pm8941-rtc";
+			interrupts = <0x0 0x61 0x1 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
+			interrupt-names = "alarm";
+		};
+	};

Can you please expand your example to include the second SID for the
PM8941 chip?  That way, it will be clear that each PMIC needs two DT
nodes; one for each SID.

Thanks,
David Collins

[1]: https://www.codeaurora.org/cgit/quic/la/kernel/msm-3.10/tree/?h=msm-3.10

[2]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/29/252

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation