[PATCHv9 3/3] arm: dts: Add Altera SDRAM controller bindings
From: Rob Herring <hidden>
Date: 2014-08-18 12:36:31
Also in:
linux-devicetree, lkml
On 07/30/2014 01:22 PM, tthayer at opensource.altera.com wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Thor Thayer <redacted> Add the Altera SDRAM controller bindings and device tree changes to the Altera SoC project. Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <redacted> --- v2: Changes to SoC SDRAM EDAC code. v3: Implement code suggestions for SDRAM EDAC code. v4: Remove syscon from SDRAM controller bindings. v5: No Change, bump version for consistency. v6: Only map the ctrlcfg register as syscon. v7: No change. Bump for consistency. v8: No change. Bump for consistency. v9: Changes to support a MFD SDRAM controller with nested EDAC. --- .../devicetree/bindings/arm/altera/socfpga-sdr.txt | 13 +++++++++++++ arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera/socfpga-sdr.txtdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera/socfpga-sdr.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera/socfpga-sdr.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2bb1ddf --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera/socfpga-sdr.txt@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +Altera SOCFPGA SDRAM Controller +The SDRAM controller is implemented as a MFD so various drivers may +nest under this main SDRAM controller binding. + +Required properties: +- compatible : "altr,sdr"; +- reg : Should contain 1 register range(address and length) + +Example: + sdr at 0xffc25000 { + compatible = "altr,sdr"; + reg = <0xffc25000 0x1000>; + };diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga.dtsi index 4676f25..ecb306d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga.dtsi@@ -603,6 +603,16 @@ }; }; + sdr at 0xffc25000 { + compatible = "altr,sdr"; + reg = <0xffc25000 0x1000>; + + sdramedac at 0 { + compatible = "altr,sdram-edac"; + interrupts = <0 39 4>; + };
This doesn't match the documentation, but I don't think this is a move in the right direction anyway. Because Linux has/wants an MFD driver is not a reason to add a sub node. It is a single h/w block and DT should reflect that. Rob