# \[PATCH v2 07/18\] drivers: reset: Add STM32 reset driver

- From: Maxime Coquelin \<mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com\>
- Date: 2015-03-10 15:44:33 
- List: linux-arm-kernel
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-arm-kernel/2015/03/4447650
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-arm-kernel/2015/02/4434727/t.md

```text
2015-03-10 16:02 GMT+01:00 Arnd Bergmann [ref]:
> On Friday 20 February 2015 19:01:06 Maxime Coquelin wrote:
>> +/* AHB1 */
>> +#define GPIOA_RESET    0
>> +#define GPIOB_RESET    1
>> +#define GPIOC_RESET    2
>> +#define GPIOD_RESET    3
>> +#define GPIOE_RESET    4
>> +#define GPIOF_RESET    5
>> +#define GPIOG_RESET    6
>> +#define GPIOH_RESET    7
>> +#define GPIOI_RESET    8
>> +#define GPIOJ_RESET    9
>> +#define GPIOK_RESET    10
>>
>
> As these are just the hardware numbers, it's better to not make them
> part of the binding at all. Instead, just document in the binding that
> one is supposed to pass the hardware number as the argument.

The reset controller is part of the RCC (Reset & Clock Controller) IP.
In this version, I only provided the reset registers to the reset
controller driver, but as per Andreas F?rber remark, I should avec a
single DT node for both the resets and clocks.

In the next version I am preparing, the defines doesn't look as
trivial as in this version, GPIOA_RESET being 128 for instance.

Is it fine for you if I keep the defines part of the binding?

Br,
Maxime
>
>         Arnd
```