Re: [PATCH v7 05/16] watchdog: lantiq: add device tree binding documentation

On 07/07/2017 04:08 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 12:40:40AM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:

quoted

The binding was not documented before, add the documentation now.

Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke-5/S+JYg5SzeELgA04lAiVw@public.gmane.org>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/watchdog/lantiq-wdt.txt    | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/lantiq-wdt.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/lantiq-wdt.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/lantiq-wdt.txt
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..c3967feebb6c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/lantiq-wdt.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+Lantiq WTD watchdog binding
+============================
+
+This describes the binding of the Lantiq watchdog driver.
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+Required properties:
+- compatible		: Should be one of
+				"lantiq,wdt"
+				"lantiq,xrx100-wdt"
+				"lantiq,xrx200-wdt"
+				"lantiq,falcon-wdt"
+- lantiq,rcu		: A phandle to the RCU syscon (required for
+			  "lantiq,falcon-wdt", "lantiq,xrx200-wdt" and
+			  "lantiq,xrx100-wdt")
+
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+Example for the watchdog on the xRX200 SoCs:
+		watchdog@803f0 {
+			compatible = "lantiq,xrx200-wdt", "lantiq,xrx100-wdt";

This is still mismatched. If the example is correct, then the compatible 
list should be:

"lantiq,wdt"
"lantiq,xrx100-wdt"
"lantiq,xrx200-wdt", "lantiq,xrx100-wdt"
"lantiq,falcon-wdt"

You can also remove "lantiq,xrx200-wdt" from the driver if you want as 
"lantiq,xrx100-wdt" is good enough to match on.

Rob

Ok thank you.

All the features that are supported by the wtd drivers use the same
register offsets on the xrx100 and xrx200 SoCs. I added the xrx200 only
if in the future we find some mismatch and I want to be able to use some
other code for this SoC.
In this case I would then list complete compatible line which should be
used for this SoC in the description of the compatible line, is that
correct?

I will update the patch, this makes sense to me.

Hauke
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html