From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: johan@kernel.org (Johan Hovold) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 17:57:32 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] rtc: at91sam9: add DT bindings documentation In-Reply-To: <20140910173532.0e8b1ef7@bbrezillon> References: <1409733934-14465-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <1409733934-14465-6-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com> <20140910121424.GG2974@localhost> <20140910152019.111c4c01@bbrezillon> <20140910150702.GK2974@localhost> <20140910173532.0e8b1ef7@bbrezillon> Message-ID: <20140910155732.GM2974@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 05:35:32PM +0200, Boris BREZILLON wrote: > On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 17:07:02 +0200 Johan Hovold wrote: > > Yes, this essentially what I suggested in the thread (and my last reply) > > and relying on syscon rather than a custom driver seems like a good > > idea. It would allow early access to the registers too with the recently > > proposed changes. It would not guarantee any kind of exclusivity, > > though, but I guess that's tolerable? > > I know about the "mfd: syscon: Decouple syscon interface from platform > devices" series, but I wonder why we would need to access GPBR > registers during early boot stages. Do you have something in mind :-)? Yeah, that's what I was referring to. In the thread from last year, Jean-Christophe mentioned something about barebox using the backup-registers. Not sure about the details, though. Johan