* [PATCH v4 0/3] Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC and Fix RTC DT node name for 5250 Soc
@ 2013-08-14 13:58 Vikas Sajjan
2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC Vikas Sajjan
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, patches, linaro-kernel
This patchset does the following 3 things:
1) Fixes the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC
2) Updates the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay"
3) Adds RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC
changes since v3:
- split the 5250 related modifications into 2 separate patch as
suggested by Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com>
changes since v2:
- split the 5250 related modifications into a separate patch.
- placed the RTC node as per the alphabetical order in the DTS file as
suggested by Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>.
changes since v1:
- made DT node status as "okay" in the dtsi file itself.
Vikas Sajjan (3):
ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC
ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to
"okay"
ARM: dts: Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi | 2 +-
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 3 ++-
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi | 6 ++++++
3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
1.7.9.5
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [PATCH v4 1/3] ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC 2013-08-14 13:58 [PATCH v4 0/3] Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC and Fix RTC DT node name for 5250 Soc Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 ` Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] ARM: dts: Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC Vikas Sajjan 2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, patches, linaro-kernel Fixes the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC as per the DT node naming convention. Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi index f65e124..4a8e223 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5.dtsi @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ interrupts = <0 54 0>; }; - rtc { + rtc@101E0000 { compatible = "samsung,s3c6410-rtc"; reg = <0x101E0000 0x100>; interrupts = <0 43 0>, <0 44 0>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi index 88589b7..f426ce6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ samsung,power-domain = <&pd_mfc>; }; - rtc { + rtc@101E0000 { clocks = <&clock 337>; clock-names = "rtc"; }; -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-14 13:58 [PATCH v4 0/3] Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC and Fix RTC DT node name for 5250 Soc Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 ` Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-15 4:32 ` Tushar Behera 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] ARM: dts: Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC Vikas Sajjan 2 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, patches, linaro-kernel Updates the RTC DT node's status to "okay", since the bindings in exynos5250.dtsi depicts the RTC h/w completely. Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi index f426ce6..c82137b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi @@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ rtc@101E0000 { clocks = <&clock 337>; clock-names = "rtc"; + status = "okay"; }; tmu@10060000 { -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-15 4:32 ` Tushar Behera 2013-08-15 8:59 ` Tomasz Figa 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Tushar Behera @ 2013-08-15 4:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vikas Sajjan Cc: linux-samsung-soc, Kukjin Kim, Patch Tracking, linaro-kernel, Doug Anderson On 14 August 2013 19:28, Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> wrote: > Updates the RTC DT node's status to "okay", since the bindings in > exynos5250.dtsi depicts the RTC h/w completely. > > Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > index f426ce6..c82137b 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > @@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ > rtc@101E0000 { > clocks = <&clock 337>; > clock-names = "rtc"; > + status = "okay"; > }; > Sometime back we had a discussion on this, the decision was to enable it in respective boards. Also if we are going ahead with this, we would need to remove the corresponding status statements from board files. [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-June/176402.html -- Tushar Behera ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-15 4:32 ` Tushar Behera @ 2013-08-15 8:59 ` Tomasz Figa 2013-08-18 18:40 ` Kukjin Kim 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Tomasz Figa @ 2013-08-15 8:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tushar Behera Cc: Vikas Sajjan, linux-samsung-soc, Kukjin Kim, Patch Tracking, linaro-kernel, Doug Anderson [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1765 bytes --] Hi Tushar, On Thursday 15 of August 2013 10:02:43 Tushar Behera wrote: > On 14 August 2013 19:28, Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> wrote: > > Updates the RTC DT node's status to "okay", since the bindings in > > exynos5250.dtsi depicts the RTC h/w completely. > > > > Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> > > --- > > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 1 + > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi index f426ce6..c82137b 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi > > @@ -181,6 +181,7 @@ > > > > rtc@101E0000 { > > > > clocks = <&clock 337>; > > clock-names = "rtc"; > > > > + status = "okay"; > > > > }; > > Sometime back we had a discussion on this, the decision was to enable > it in respective boards. This is not entirely true. According to ePAPR, chapter 2.3.4, the status property has a well defined meaning and it should be set to "disabled" when "the device is not presently operational, but it might become operational in the future (for example, something is not plugged in, or switched off)". This means that unless setup of the device is missing something (e.g. board-specific properties, like regulators or pin config) or there is a valid technical reason for disabling the device by default (e.g. it needs certain SoC pins to be properly connected to something), then such device should be "okay", because it is operational. > Also if we are going ahead with this, we would need to remove the > corresponding status statements from board files. Yes, this is true. Best regards, Tomasz [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-15 8:59 ` Tomasz Figa @ 2013-08-18 18:40 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-08-19 8:18 ` Vikas Sajjan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Kukjin Kim @ 2013-08-18 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tomasz Figa Cc: Tushar Behera, Vikas Sajjan, linux-samsung-soc, Kukjin Kim, Patch Tracking, linaro-kernel, Doug Anderson, devicetree On 08/15/13 17:59, Tomasz Figa wrote: > Hi Tushar, > [...] >>> + status = "okay"; >>> >>> }; >> >> Sometime back we had a discussion on this, the decision was to enable >> it in respective boards. > > This is not entirely true. > > According to ePAPR, chapter 2.3.4, the status property has a well defined > meaning and it should be set to "disabled" when "the device is not > presently operational, but it might become operational in the future (for > example, something is not plugged in, or switched off)". > So in my understanding, you mean using "okay" is wrong and only "disabled" is used? and in board dt file? Already there are too many "okay"... > This means that unless setup of the device is missing something (e.g. > board-specific properties, like regulators or pin config) or there is a > valid technical reason for disabling the device by default (e.g. it needs > certain SoC pins to be properly connected to something), then such device > should be "okay", because it is operational. > >> Also if we are going ahead with this, we would need to remove the >> corresponding status statements from board files. > > Yes, this is true. > According to above, probably we should add "disabled" in board dt file? If I'm wrong, correct me. (+ dt ml) Anyway, I'm not sure how to use 'okay' and 'disabled' for status... I think, every hardware information should be defined in SoC dt file and maybe some of them could be set disabled or okay in each board dt file... Any suggestions? Thanks, Kukjin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-18 18:40 ` Kukjin Kim @ 2013-08-19 8:18 ` Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-19 8:33 ` Tushar Behera 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-19 8:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Kukjin Kim Cc: Tomasz Figa, Tushar Behera, linux-samsung-soc, Patch Tracking, linaro-kernel, Doug Anderson, devicetree, sunil joshi Hi Kukjin, On 19 August 2013 00:10, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote: > On 08/15/13 17:59, Tomasz Figa wrote: >> >> Hi Tushar, >> > [...] > > >>>> + status = "okay"; >>>> >>>> }; >>> >>> >>> Sometime back we had a discussion on this, the decision was to enable >>> it in respective boards. >> >> >> This is not entirely true. >> >> According to ePAPR, chapter 2.3.4, the status property has a well defined >> meaning and it should be set to "disabled" when "the device is not >> presently operational, but it might become operational in the future (for >> example, something is not plugged in, or switched off)". >> > So in my understanding, you mean using "okay" is wrong and only "disabled" > is used? and in board dt file? Already there are too many "okay"... > > >> This means that unless setup of the device is missing something (e.g. >> board-specific properties, like regulators or pin config) or there is a >> valid technical reason for disabling the device by default (e.g. it needs >> certain SoC pins to be properly connected to something), then such device >> should be "okay", because it is operational. >> >>> Also if we are going ahead with this, we would need to remove the >>> corresponding status statements from board files. >> >> >> Yes, this is true. >> > According to above, probably we should add "disabled" in board dt file? > what Tushar meant was, since we made the status as "okay" in exynos5250.dtsi itself, its better to remove the "okay" from the board DTS files of exynos5250 ( exynos5250-snow.dts and exynos5250-arndale.dts). Am I right Tushar? > If I'm wrong, correct me. > > (+ dt ml) > > Anyway, I'm not sure how to use 'okay' and 'disabled' for status... > > I think, every hardware information should be defined in SoC dt file and > maybe some of them could be set disabled or okay in each board dt file... > > Any suggestions? > > Thanks, > Kukjin -- Thanks and Regards Vikas Sajjan ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" 2013-08-19 8:18 ` Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-19 8:33 ` Tushar Behera 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Tushar Behera @ 2013-08-19 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vikas Sajjan Cc: Kukjin Kim, Tomasz Figa, linux-samsung-soc, Patch Tracking, linaro-kernel, Doug Anderson, devicetree, sunil joshi On 19 August 2013 13:48, Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> wrote: > Hi Kukjin, > > On 19 August 2013 00:10, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote: >> On 08/15/13 17:59, Tomasz Figa wrote: >>> >>> Hi Tushar, >>> >> [...] >> >> >>>>> + status = "okay"; >>>>> >>>>> }; >>>> >>>> >>>> Sometime back we had a discussion on this, the decision was to enable >>>> it in respective boards. >>> >>> >>> This is not entirely true. >>> >>> According to ePAPR, chapter 2.3.4, the status property has a well defined >>> meaning and it should be set to "disabled" when "the device is not >>> presently operational, but it might become operational in the future (for >>> example, something is not plugged in, or switched off)". >>> Ok. >> So in my understanding, you mean using "okay" is wrong and only "disabled" >> is used? and in board dt file? Already there are too many "okay"... >> >> >>> This means that unless setup of the device is missing something (e.g. >>> board-specific properties, like regulators or pin config) or there is a >>> valid technical reason for disabling the device by default (e.g. it needs >>> certain SoC pins to be properly connected to something), then such device >>> should be "okay", because it is operational. >>> >>>> Also if we are going ahead with this, we would need to remove the >>>> corresponding status statements from board files. >>> >>> >>> Yes, this is true. >>> >> According to above, probably we should add "disabled" in board dt file? >> > > what Tushar meant was, since we made the status as "okay" in > exynos5250.dtsi itself, its better to remove the "okay" from the board > DTS files of exynos5250 ( exynos5250-snow.dts and > exynos5250-arndale.dts). Am I right Tushar? > Yeah. Since we are going ahead with enabling the RTC node in exynos5250.dtsi, I thought it would be good to remove the RTC nodes from subsequent board files. > >> If I'm wrong, correct me. >> >> (+ dt ml) >> >> Anyway, I'm not sure how to use 'okay' and 'disabled' for status... >> >> I think, every hardware information should be defined in SoC dt file and >> maybe some of them could be set disabled or okay in each board dt file... >> >> Any suggestions? >> >> Thanks, >> Kukjin > > > > -- > Thanks and Regards > Vikas Sajjan -- Tushar Behera ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v4 3/3] ARM: dts: Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC 2013-08-14 13:58 [PATCH v4 0/3] Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC and Fix RTC DT node name for 5250 Soc Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 ` Vikas Sajjan 2 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Vikas Sajjan @ 2013-08-14 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-samsung-soc; +Cc: kgene.kim, patches, linaro-kernel Adds RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan <vikas.sajjan@linaro.org> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi index 9e90d1e..713bb5a 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420.dtsi @@ -126,6 +126,12 @@ interrupts = <0 47 0>; }; + rtc@101E0000 { + clocks = <&clock 317>; + clock-names = "rtc"; + status = "okay"; + }; + serial@12C00000 { clocks = <&clock 257>, <&clock 128>; clock-names = "uart", "clk_uart_baud0"; -- 1.7.9.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-08-19 8:33 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-08-14 13:58 [PATCH v4 0/3] Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC and Fix RTC DT node name for 5250 Soc Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] ARM: dts: Fix the RTC DT node name for Exynos5250 SoC Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] ARM: dts: Update the status of RTC DT node of Exynos5250 SoC to "okay" Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-15 4:32 ` Tushar Behera 2013-08-15 8:59 ` Tomasz Figa 2013-08-18 18:40 ` Kukjin Kim 2013-08-19 8:18 ` Vikas Sajjan 2013-08-19 8:33 ` Tushar Behera 2013-08-14 13:58 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] ARM: dts: Add RTC DT node to Exynos5420 SoC Vikas Sajjan
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.