From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: minyard@acm.org (Corey Minyard) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 11:06:08 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] ipmi: bt-bmc: Use a regmap for register access In-Reply-To: <1487602379.21631.2.camel@aj.id.au> References: <20161206025715.2002-1-andrew@aj.id.au> <36014e0c-82f8-eeaf-ee2a-6c1e413b957d@kaod.org> <1487565939.3779.4.camel@aj.id.au> <1fe8fe1f-e035-8ef1-cecd-d3d29bcda075@acm.org> <1487602379.21631.2.camel@aj.id.au> Message-ID: <9eaac4c7-d274-94b7-17a1-02b00342ce05@acm.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/20/2017 08:52 AM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > On Mon, 2017-02-20 at 07:35 -0600, Corey Minyard wrote: >> On 02/19/2017 10:45 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>> Hi Cory, >>> >>> On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 16:02 +0100, C?dric Le Goater wrote: >>>> [ this is a resend bc of some mailing list issues] >>>> >>>> On 12/06/2016 03:57 AM, Andrew Jeffery wrote: >>>>> The registers for the bt-bmc device live under the Aspeed LPC >>>>> controller. Devicetree bindings have recently been introduced for the >>>>> LPC controller where the "host" portion of the LPC register space is >>>>> described as a syscon device. Future devicetrees describing the bt-bmc >>>>> device should nest its node under the appropriate "simple-mfd", "syscon" >>>>> compatible node. >>>>> >>>>> This change allows the bt-bmc driver to function with both syscon and >>>>> non-syscon- based devicetree descriptions by always using a regmap for >>>>> register access, either retrieved from the parent syscon device or >>>>> instantiated if none exists. >>>>> >>>>> The patch has been tested on an OpenPOWER Palmetto machine, successfully >>>>> booting, rebooting and powering down the host. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery >>>> It would be nice to have an example of the associated binding. >>>> I did not see it. A part from that : >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: C?dric Le Goater >>> Will this make it into 4.11? >> I thought you were doing a v2 with a few little fixes. Get it to me >> quickly, if you can. > Reading back it was a bit ambiguous. No worries, I'll roll in the small > fixes and send a v2. Yeah, it was, sorry, I should have been clear there. I'll leave it in the linux-next tree for a bit, then ask Linus for a pull. Thanks, -corey > Cheers, > > Andrew