[RFC PATCH 12/14] ARM: dts: exynos5: add system register support

[Sachin Kamat]

On 15 April 2014 14:48, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki at samsung.com> wrote:
> On 15/04/14 10:41, Sachin Kamat wrote:
>> On 15 April 2014 11:17, YoungJun Cho <yj44.cho at samsung.com> wrote:
>>> This patch adds sysreg device node, and sysreg property to fimd device node
>>> which is required to use I80 interface.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: YoungJun Cho <yj44.cho at samsung.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Inki Dae <inki.dae at samsung.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park at samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi |    6 ++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi
>>> index 258dca4..f938bbb 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi
>>> @@ -88,12 +88,18 @@
>>>                 status = "disabled";
>>>         };
>>>
>>> +       sys_reg: syscon at 10050000 {
>>> +               compatible = "samsung,exynos5-sysreg", "syscon";
>>
>> Do we really need a separate string for this? Can't we use
>> "samsung,exynos4-sysreg" itself?
>
> Currently only "syscon" is meaningful in Linux, and we add second SoC
> specific compatible to be able to distinguish between various SoC
> revisions, should any SoC specific quirks be handled in future.
> Thus there is no much point in adding "samsung,exynos4-sysreg" to
> exynos5.dtsi. We could as well only leave "syscon" entry alone.
> My suggestion is to keep "samsung,exynos5-sysreg", so for instance
> Exynos4 and Exynos5 SOC series SYSREG blocks can be identified in
> an OS.

Yes, this sounds reasonable.

-- 
With warm regards,
Sachin