From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64: dts: allwinner: h6: add r_watchog node Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 18:05:45 +0200 Message-ID: <20190423160545.muolantrdppz35rz@flea> References: <20190411154534.25563-1-peron.clem@gmail.com> <20190411154534.25563-3-peron.clem@gmail.com> Reply-To: maxime.ripard-LDxbnhwyfcJBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Sender: linux-sunxi-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , To: =?utf-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQgUMOpcm9u?= Cc: Rob Herring , Chen-Yu Tsai , Icenowy Zheng , devicetree , linux-kernel , linux-arm-kernel , linux-sunxi List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 19, 2019 at 09:00:42PM +0200, Cl=C3=A9ment P=C3=A9ron wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2019 at 17:34, Cl=C3=A9ment P=C3=A9ron wrote: > > > > Allwinner H6 has a r_watchdog similar to A64. > > > > Declare it in the device-tree. > > > > Signed-off-by: Cl=C3=A9ment P=C3=A9ron > > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi b/arch/arm64/= boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi > > index 5c2f5451227b..66dc684a378e 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi > > @@ -622,6 +622,13 @@ > > #reset-cells =3D <1>; > > }; > > > > + r_watchdog: watchdog@7020400 { > > + compatible =3D "allwinner,sun50i-a64-wdt", > > + "allwinner,sun6i-a31-wdt"; > > + reg =3D <0x07020400 0x20>; > > + interrupts =3D ; > > + }; > > I have set the same compatible as A64 because regarding the User > Manual they have exactly the same memory mapping. > However we don't know really if it's the same IP version, maybe there > will be an errata one day. > So I would like to know if it's better to define the h6-wdt also > compatible =3D "allwinner,sun50i-h6-wdt", "allwinner,sun50i-a64-wdt", > "allwinner,sun6i-a31-wdt"; > > I would say Yes, but with this logic we would have to had a new > compatible each time there is a new SoC. Why not just having the A31 compatible? Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= linux-sunxi" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to linux-sunxi+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.