From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bonbons@linux-vserver.org (Bruno =?UTF-8?B?UHLDqW1vbnQ=?=) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 22:08:27 +0100 Subject: [RFC Patch 1/4] mfd: AXP20x: Add power supply bindings documentation In-Reply-To: <20141104143117.GC26729@lukather> References: <20141020221959.2f312906@neptune.home> <20141020223314.0484f795@neptune.home> <20141021101503.GE26842@x1> <20141021180916.432f02e1@neptune.home> <20141021191905.GR21108@lukather> <20141103210244.1425e0c7@neptune.home> <20141104143117.GC26729@lukather> Message-ID: <20141104220827.773c53d0@neptune.home> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Maxime, On Tue, 04 November 2014 Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 09:02:44PM +0100, Bruno Pr?mont wrote: > > Doing something like this?: > > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20-cubietruck.dts > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun7i-a20-cubietruck.dts > > @@ -126,9 +126,11 @@ > > interrupt-controller; > > #interrupt-cells = <1>; > > > > - backup = <3000000 200>; > > - battery.resistance = <100>; > > - battery.capacity = <2000>; > > + x-powers,backup = <3000000 200>; > > I don't really remember what was that property used for. Would it make > sense to put it into the battery node? The backup/rtc battery is completely distinct from main battery. It's presence is in no way related to that of the main battery, thus I would not put it into the same node. As all the information needed is included in the property I see no reason to move it into a separate node. > > + battery: battery at 0 { > > + x-powers,resistance = <100>; > > + x-powers,capacity = <2000>; > > + }; > > }; > > }; > > > > What are the rules to define the label after the colon? > > Looking at the existing nodes it's either some address or a number... > > It's not called the label, but the node name, and it's defined in the > ePAPR. > > It's [@
] > > The address being something to identify the node on a bus, so it can > be a chip select number, a memory address, an i2c address, > etc. there's really no absolute answer here. > > I don't think you really need one in this case. In that case, I better omit it completely. > > and then the following in driver code (also adjusting the other > > property names accessed)?: > > > > @@ -678,11 +677,11 @@ static int axp20x_battery_config(struct platform_device *pdev, > > if (ret) > > return ret; > > > > - np = of_node_get(axp20x->dev->of_node); > > + np = of_find_node_by_name(axp20x->dev->of_node, "battery"); > > if (!np) > > return -ENODEV; > > > > - ret = of_property_read_u32_array(np, "battery.ocv", ocv, 16); > > + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(np, "x-powers,ocv", ocv, 16); > > for (i = 0; ret == 0 && i < ARRAY_SIZE(ocv); i++) > > if (ocv[i] > 100) { > > dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "OCV[%d] %u > 100\n", i, ocv[i]); > > Yep, it looks sensible. Thanks, Bruno -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 648 bytes Desc: not available URL: