Re: [PATCH v2 06/29] mtd: Add support for reading MTD devices via the nvmem API

Srinivas Kandagatla
2018-08-21T13:09:37Z

On 20/08/18 19:20, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:43:34 +0100
> Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> Overall am still not able to clear visualize on how MTD bindings with
>> nvmem cells would look in both partition and un-partition usecases?
>> An example DT would be nice here!!
>
> Something along those lines:
>
This looks good to me.
> mtdnode {
> nvmem-cells {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
>
> cell@0 {
> reg = <0x0 0x14>;
> };
> };
>
> partitions {
> compatible = "fixed-partitions";
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
>
> partition@0 {
> reg = <0x0 0x20000>;
>
> nvmem-cells {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <1>;
>
> cell@0 {
> reg = <0x0 0x10>;
> };
> };
> };
> };
> }; >

Just curious...Is there a reason why we can't do it like this?:
Is this because of issue of #address-cells and #size-cells Or mtd
bindings always prefer subnodes?

mtdnode {
reg = <0x0123000 0x40000>;
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;
cell@0 {
compatible = "nvmem-cell";
reg = <0x0 0x14>;
};

partitions {
compatible = "fixed-partitions";
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <1>;

partition@0 {
reg = <0x0 0x20000>;
cell@0 {
compatible = "nvmem-cell";
reg = <0x0 0x10>;
};
};
};
};

Am okay either way!

thanks,
srini