Hi,

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:34:50AM +0000, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com wrote:

Hi Sebastian,

On 23/01/2019 at 19:34, Sebastian Reichel wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:57:42AM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:

quoted

Add support for additional reset causes and the proper compatibility
string for sam9x60 SoC. The restart function is the same as the samx7.

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>
---
  drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c | 13 +++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c b/drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c
index f44a9ffcc2ab..44ca983a49a1 100644
--- a/drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c
+++ b/drivers/power/reset/at91-reset.c

@@ -44,6 +44,9 @@ enum reset_type {
  	RESET_TYPE_WATCHDOG	= 2,
  	RESET_TYPE_SOFTWARE	= 3,
  	RESET_TYPE_USER		= 4,
+	RESET_TYPE_CPU_FAIL	= 6,
+	RESET_TYPE_XTAL_FAIL	= 7,
+	RESET_TYPE_ULP2		= 8,

what happened to 5? :)

That a good question ;-)

It's marked as "Reserved"... which opens up a whole new field of 
speculation :-)

Ok :)

[..]

quoted

quoted

  	{ .compatible = "atmel,samx7-rstc", .data = samx7_restart },
+	{ .compatible = "microchip,sam9x60-rstc", .data = samx7_restart },
  	{ /* sentinel */ }
  };
  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, at91_reset_of_match);

Patch looks fine to me. But I will wait a bit with merging, so that
Alexandre or Ludovic have a chance to provide feedback.

What about merging this patch with the whole series through the at91 
then arm-soc trees?

It seems to be possible to merge this standalone, but merging
through at91/arm-soc is also fine with me.

Acked-by: Sebastian Reichel <redacted>

-- Sebastian