On 18/12/2019 16:52:21+0000, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:

On 18.12.2019 18:43, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 18/12/2019 16:24:00+0000, Eugen.Hristev@microchip.com wrote:

quoted

From: Eugen Hristev <redacted>

This allows the RTC node to have child nodes in DT.
This allows subnodes to be probed.

Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <redacted>
---
  drivers/rtc/rtc-at91rm9200.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-at91rm9200.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-at91rm9200.c
index 3b833e0..f1b5b3d 100644
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-at91rm9200.c
+++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-at91rm9200.c

@@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ static int __init at91_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
       at91_rtc_write_ier(AT91_RTC_SECEV);

       dev_info(&pdev->dev, "AT91 Real Time Clock driver.\n");
-     return 0;
+     return of_platform_populate(pdev->dev.of_node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);

You can avoid the DT binding change and DT parsing by using
platform_add_device here. I don't think there is any point describing
the trigger as a child node (a watchdog functionality wouldn't be
described for example).

Hi,

It's needed because the ADC needs a link to the trigger device. This is 
a hardware link inside the SoC, so I thought the best way is to describe 
this hardware is in the Device Tree.
Otherwise the ADC node is unaware of the RTC triggering possibility.
If we just assign the RTC trigger device to the ADC through the sysfs, 
the ADC cannot distinguish between the RTC trigger and other various 
triggers which can be attached.

I'm not sure this links is required but I will let Jonathan review. Even
if it is needed, you can still use the rtc node to describe that link.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel