From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: scottwood@freescale.com (Scott Wood) Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 21:43:52 -0500 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/2] fsl: Add binding for RCPM In-Reply-To: References: <1443083354-37369-1-git-send-email-dongsheng.wang@freescale.com> <1443123009.32298.29.camel@freescale.com> Message-ID: <1443149032.32298.102.camel@freescale.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2015-09-24 at 21:38 -0500, Wang Dongsheng-B40534 wrote: > > > +* Freescale RCPM Wakeup Source Device Tree Bindings > > > +------------------------------------------- > > > +Required rcpm-wakeup property should be added to a device node if the > > > device > > > +can be used as a wakeup source. > > > + > > > + - rcpm-wakeup: The value of the property consists of cells, the > > > number of > > > + cells defined in "fsl,#rcpm-wakeup-cells". The first cell is a > > > pointer > > > + to the rcpm node, the second cell is the bit mask that should be > > > set > > > + in IPPDEXPCR0, and the third cell is for IPPDEXPCR1, and so on. > > > > The phandle should not be included in the cell count. > > > > Yes, the first cell "&rcpm" should be in the cell count, right? No. None of the other #foo-cells work that way. -Scott