Re: [PATCH v1 04/12] nvmem: microchip-otpc: Add SAM9X60 support

[claudiu beznea <claudiu.beznea@tuxon.dev>]

Hi, Alexander,

On 28.08.2024 11:09, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> Hello Claudiu,
> 
> Am Sat, Aug 24, 2024 at 06:53:53PM +0300 schrieb claudiu beznea:
>>
>>
>> On 21.08.2024 13:59, Alexander Dahl wrote:
>>> Register layout is almost identical to sama7g5 OTPC.
>>
>> Can you please mention some major differences?
> 
> - SAMA7G5 has an additional bit SECURE in the OTPC Header Register
>   (OTPC_HR) not present on SAM9X60.
> - SAMA7G5 has an additional register OTPC Secure Custom Address
>   Register (OTPC_SCAR) not present on SAM9X60.
> - SAMA7G5 has an additional field SECDBG[7:0] in OTPC User Hardware
>   Configuration 0 Register (OTPC_UHC0R) not present on SAM9X60.
> - SAMA7G5 has three additional bits (SCPGDIS, SCLKDIS, SCINVDIS) in
>   the OTPC User Hardware Configuration 1 Register (OTPC_UHC1R) not
>   present on SAM9X60.
> 
> All are currently not used by the driver.
> 
> Is adding this information to the commit message sufficient?

More than enough. If you can do a summary of it would be better, I think.

Thank you,
Claudiu Beznea

> 
> Greets
> Alex
> 
>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@thorsis.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c | 1 +
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c b/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>> index bd3383eabdf6..b8ed7412dbca 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/microchip-otpc.c
>>> @@ -271,6 +271,7 @@ static int mchp_otpc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>  
>>>  static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused mchp_otpc_ids[] = {
>>>  	{ .compatible = "microchip,sama7g5-otpc", },
>>> +	{ .compatible = "microchip,sam9x60-otpc", },
>>>  	{ },
>>>  };
>>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mchp_otpc_ids);