From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Rutland Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ARM: tegra: add nvidia,wdt-timer-id optional property Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 17:10:53 +0000 Message-ID: <20140203171053.GA28338@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1391204811-6293-1-git-send-email-achew@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1391204811-6293-1-git-send-email-achew@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Chew Cc: "robh+dt@kernel.org" , Pawel Moll , "ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk" , "galak@codeaurora.org" , "rob@landley.net" , "swarren@wwwdotorg.org" , "thierry.reding@gmail.com" , "abrestic@chromium.org" , "dgreid@chromium.org" , "katierh@chromium.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 09:46:51PM +0000, Andrew Chew wrote: > This optional property can be used to specify which timers are to be used > for hardware watchdog timeouts (via a tegra wdt driver). Is there any reason that a particular timer should be used? This shouldn't even mention the driver, as the binding should describe the HW, not how it's used by Linux at the moment. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Chew > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/nvidia,tegra30-timer.txt | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/nvidia,tegra30-timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/nvidia,tegra30-timer.txt > index b5082a1..e87fa70 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/nvidia,tegra30-timer.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/nvidia,tegra30-timer.txt > @@ -13,6 +13,13 @@ Required properties: > - clocks : Must contain one entry, for the module clock. > See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details. > > +Optional properties: > + > +- nvidia,wdt-timer-id: A list of timer IDs to be used for watchdogs. > + Watchdog 0 will be assigned to the first timer listed, watchdog 1 will > + be assigned to the second timer listed, etc. up to the number of watchdogs > + available. This sounds like a description of what software should do. Is there any reason this order is important? Also, it feels odd for the proerty name to be singular given it's a list... Thanks, Mark.