From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj-sclMFOaUSTBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] ARM: at91: add Shutdown Controller (SHDWC) DT support
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 19:59:05 +0100
Message-ID: <20120307185905.GC27213@game.jcrosoft.org>
References: <20120302192844.GB21255@game.jcrosoft.org>
 <201203022024.19488.arnd@arndb.de>
 <20120307173828.GD17087@game.jcrosoft.org>
 <201203071849.36867.arnd@arndb.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <201203071849.36867.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss>,
 <mailto:devicetree-discuss-request-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org>
Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On 18:49 Wed 07 Mar     , Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 07 March 2012, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > On 20:24 Fri 02 Mar     , Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Friday 02 March 2012, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> > > > +       }
> > > > +
> > > > +       if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "atmel,at91sam9x5-shdwc")) {
> > > > +               have_rtt = false;
> > > > +               have_rtc = true;
> > > > +       } else if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "atmel,at91sam9rl-shdwc")) {
> > > > +               have_rtt = true;
> > > > +               have_rtc = true;
> > > > +       } else {
> > > > +               have_rtt = true;
> > > > +               have_rtc = false;
> > > > +       }
> > > > +
> > > > +       if (have_rtc && of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,wakeup-rtc-timer"))
> > > > +                       mode |= AT91_SHDW_RTCWKEN;
> > > > +
> > > > +       if (have_rtt && of_property_read_bool(np, "atmel,wakeup-rtt-timer"))
> > > > +                       mode |= AT91_SHDW_RTTWKEN;
> > > > +
> > > > +       at91_shdwc_write(AT91_SHDW_MR, wakeup_mode | mode);
> > > > +
> > > 
> > > Hi Jean-Christophe,
> > > 
> > > I don't understand why you check the specific part here. Isn't it enough to
> > > check the property when you already mandate that they can only be present
> > > on devices that support the specific wakeup?
> > > 
> > > If there is a good explanation for that, maybe add a code comment why it's
> > > required.
> > some wake update source exist on few soc and we are not supposed to set the
> > bit otherwise
> > 
> 
> I still don't understand: Doesn't the property already give the information?
Yes
> In general, you should try to encode these things in specific properties instead of
> checking the compatible property.
But I check that no mistake is done in the DT as the source of wakeup is
availlable on different version of the IP

Just more cautious

Best Regards,
J.