From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linus.walleij@linaro.org (Linus Walleij) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 13:14:15 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/8 v2] leds: add device tree bindings for register bit LEDs In-Reply-To: References: <1409659354-23553-1-git-send-email-linus.walleij@linaro.org> <1409659354-23553-3-git-send-email-linus.walleij@linaro.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >> +LED sub-node properties: >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible : must be "register-bit-led" >> +- offset : register offset to the register controlling this LED >> +- mask : bit mask for the bit controlling this LED in the register > > Why don't you use a "reg" property with "#address-cells = <2>" and > "#size-cells = <1>", so you can store offset and mask there? Because "reg" means a register range not based off another range, i.e. not relative, and the OF cores does not allow overlapping reg ranges as would be the case here IIRC. >> +syscon: syscon at 10000000 { >> + compatible = "arm,realview-pb1176-syscon", "syscon"; >> + reg = <0x10000000 0x1000>; >> + >> + led at 08.0 { >> + compatible = "register-bit-led"; >> + offset = <0x08>; >> + mask = <0x01>; >> + label = "versatile:0"; >> + linux,default-trigger = "heartbeat"; >> + default-state = "on"; >> + }; > > ePAPR v1.1 says: > > "The unit-address must match the first address specified in the reg property > of the node. If the node has no reg property, the @ and unit-address must > be omitted ..." > > So you cannot have the "@8.0" without a "reg" property. This terminology was suggested by Rob Herring due to the fact that there were no previous examples. Rob: care to comment? Right now I have that distinct feeling of despair as the v8 patch set is still stuck in DT syntax discussions... Yours, Linus Walleij