On Aug 5, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Scott Wood wrote:

On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 11:05 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:

quoted

On Aug 1, 2013, at 6:02 AM, Shaveta Leekha wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Shaveta Leekha <redacted>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/maple.txt      |   30 ++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/maple.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/maple.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/maple.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..da51c5f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/powerpc/fsl/maple.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+* Freescale MAPLE Multi Accelerator Platform Engine Baseband 3
+  (MAPLE-B3)device nodes
+
+Supported chips:
+Example: B4860
+
+Required properties:
+
+- compatible:	Should contain "fsl,maple-b3-liodn" as the value
+		This identifies Multi Accelerator Platform Engine
+		Baseband 3 block.This representation is required
+		for doing the PAMU/LIODN programming on the Linux side.

This compatible makes no sense, we shouldn't be marking a full HW block with some name that is just intended for LIODN convenance.

The point is we're not describing the whole block here, because the rest
of the block is owned by an external entity (the DSP cores).

So the binding should make that far more clear that the MAPLE would be controlled by DSP SW.

quoted

Is this version 3 of the block?  If so a name like "fsl,maple-v3" or "fsl,maple-v3.0" would be more appropriate.

- k

quoted

+
+- reg:		offset and length of the register set for the device
+

So the reg should limit itself to the LIODN registers only.

quoted

quoted

+Devices that have LIODNs need to specify links to the parent PAMU controller
+(the actual PAMU controller that this device is connected to) and a pointer to
+the LIODN register, if applicable.

Does Maple not have any IRQs associated with it?

maple-liodn doesn't.

-Scott