Re: [PATCH v2 16/22] dt-bindings: rtc: qcom-pm8xxx: add nvmem-cell offset

[Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>]

On 11/02/2023 09:22:54+0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:48:08PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 02/02/2023 16:54:42+0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > On many Qualcomm platforms the PMIC RTC control and time registers are
> > > read-only so that the RTC time can not be updated. Instead an offset
> > > needs be stored in some machine-specific non-volatile memory, which a
> > > driver can take into account.
> > > 
> > > Add an 'offset' nvmem cell which can be used to store a 32-bit offset
> > > from the Unix epoch so that the RTC time can be updated on such
> > > platforms.
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > >  .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml     | 12 ++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
> > > index 21c8ea08ff0a..b95a69cc9ae0 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/qcom-pm8xxx-rtc.yaml
> > > @@ -40,6 +40,16 @@ properties:
> > >      description:
> > >        Indicates that the setting of RTC time is allowed by the host CPU.
> > >  
> > > +  nvmem-cells:
> > > +    items:
> > > +      - description:
> > > +          four-byte nvmem cell holding a little-endian offset from the Unix
> > > +          epoch representing the time when the RTC timer was last reset
> > > +
> > > +  nvmem-cell-names:
> > > +    items:
> > > +      - const: offset
> > > +
> > >    wakeup-source: true
> > 
> > The patch doesn't apply because this part of the context is not
> > upstream. Can you rebase?
> 
> Ah, sorry about that. That's because of commit 51b3802e7960
> ("dt-bindings: rtc: qcom-pm8xxx: allow 'wakeup-source' property") which
> is now in Linus's tree (and your rtc-fixes branch).
> 
> Do you still want me to rebase or do you prefer to handle the conflict
> some other way?

Ah yes, my bad, I'll merge rtc-fixes in rtc-next before applying


-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com