Re: [PATCH 2/5] Add legacy devices to mpc8641_hpcn.dts

[Wade Farnsworth <wfarnsworth@mvista.com>]

On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 11:37 -0500, Jon Loeliger wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 11:27, Wade Farnsworth wrote:

<snip>

> > +			isa@f0 {
> > +				device_type = "isa";
> >  				#interrupt-cells = <2>;
> 
> Yea, thanks.  BTW, will this be sufficient to now identify the
> primary controller and not doink with the legacy IO ports now?
> Or is that being handled differently somehow?

I'm not sure what you're referring to here.  Can you clarify this a
little?

> 
> > +				#size-cells = <1>;
> > +				#address-cells = <2>;
> > +				reg = <f000 0 0 0 0>;
> > +				ranges = <1 0 01000000 0 0 00001000>;
> > +				interrupt-parent = <4d0>;
> 
> That 4d0 should likely be &i8259.
> 
> > +				8042@60 {
> > +					device_type = "8042";
> > +					reg = <1 60 1 1 64 1>;
> > +					interrupts = <1 3 c 3>;
> > +					interrupt-parent = <4d0>;
> > +				};
> 
> Ditto.

Yes, of course.  Thanks.

> 
> > +				rtc@70 {
> > +					device_type = "rtc";
> > +					reg = <1 70 2>;
> > +				};
> 
> Is "rtc" a standard OF device, or are we making up a
> new thing that should be documented in booting-with-OF.txt ?
> And is the plan to somehow use this entry in the future?

It is my understanding that "rtc" is a standard OF device.  Can anybody
confirm this?

This could be used in the platform-specific RTC code to get the ports
from the device tree.  Currently, however, I simply use RTC_PORT(x) from
asm/mc146818rtc.h.  Is it preferable to use the device tree here?

--Wade

> 
> Thanks,
> jdl
> 
>