From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22110C433B4 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 05:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E0C0610C8 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 05:25:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2E0C0610C8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=aj.id.au Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FGmmC6WTXz3bqZ for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:24:59 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=aSXk2orP; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=LLq6rlxZ; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=aj.id.au (client-ip=66.111.4.230; helo=new4-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=andrew@aj.id.au; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=aj.id.au header.i=@aj.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=aSXk2orP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=LLq6rlxZ; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from new4-smtp.messagingengine.com (new4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FGmlk4pvFz300S; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 15:24:34 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0960580747; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 01:24:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 09 Apr 2021 01:24:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aj.id.au; h= mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to:cc :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=Tsg8t/mJg/l7Xo3qIgT/COuJ+KimOhQ l4GFUqpSEKJU=; b=aSXk2orPauSq4IpUw+9+U8Q+/ZS2pBnkJOqeVdwgpSBrKH4 rwavWdTu3RER4VS7ec2GKaKA3VBup6i5FRgceSmosDEpNhR3yKU3Q9k1Z77gwZMq fMuDesrezZk0YDWrY7h5n2h24EtV5hXgtSNcriyPmIW5FXNfXAXnKbuKx6E3EmFi j4y/y5m2pg4ITm7HkFDTZitQ0YJl3fwHl0fSsGao+U8lB2V3H/G/H9dZj+KD9ImQ sV8T6R9FdYPLjzxVsFhD6AFW5Dd6144sISzIv3e7Auyv4KKMTc35BcPjLpP8ZIKo 9iwvRqIHFtjEXrFzmQjYRp7iSFMEc6i6bP25Dzw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=Tsg8t/ mJg/l7Xo3qIgT/COuJ+KimOhQl4GFUqpSEKJU=; b=LLq6rlxZTo+gKhwAqZOsyR oCA7427BBoQgCiUa3Vhu8hbEm+n8C8IcPqTyFsBmg6dvtdlxGRSdn2l4YhGgpp2M TEbAin9Abtfcf+PSvvcJTVuneaDzSRcDb2tZDKuY9bfMWflUgo+yoOv122yelZKe YX6GCr7VdccJr2l1tBYQmTVqTHT0x3HDIIJl5r6p4RWqC+vmyZC45kuLYkQaLAf3 02wf4KYGtPtH9eNskdObT2YEGBzjiOiVeU9aWoSH3NkDT4DGxflX7E3ZsB0HGSzV 40qQpDIGnIQ6U+FZYs4zJEv/sjjAWo3NJbfmlJYhebddUB9/FVIXErgRhOzksX2Q == X-ME-Sender:

X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudektddgleefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtredtreertdenucfhrhhomhepfdetnhgu rhgvficulfgvfhhfvghrhidfuceorghnughrvgifsegrjhdrihgurdgruheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhephefhfeekgfekudevheffheeihedujeefjeevjeefudfgfeeutdeuvdeh hfevueffnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh eprghnughrvgifsegrjhdrihgurdgruh X-ME-Proxy:

Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 7ADBDA0007C; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 01:24:29 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.5.0-alpha0-273-g8500d2492d-fm-20210323.002-g8500d249 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: <20210319062752.145730-1-andrew@aj.id.au> Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 14:54:08 +0930 From: "Andrew Jeffery" To: "Joel Stanley" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/21] dt-bindings: aspeed-lpc: Remove LPC partitioning Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: devicetree , Linus Walleij , Ryan Chen , Tomer Maimon , Corey Minyard , Rob Herring , Avi Fishman , Patrick Venture , "Chia-Wei, Wang" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Tali Perry , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Rob Herring , Linux ARM , openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, Lee Jones , OpenBMC Maillist , linux-aspeed , Benjamin Fair Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, at 12:48, Joel Stanley wrote: > On Fri, 19 Mar 2021 at 06:28, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > > From: "Chia-Wei, Wang" > > > > The LPC controller has no concept of the BMC and the Host partitions. > > This patch fixes the documentation by removing the description on LPC > > partitions. The register offsets illustrated in the DTS node examples > > are also fixed to adapt to the LPC DTS change. > > Is this accurate: > > The node examples change their reg address to be an offset from the > LPC HC to be an offset from the base of the LPC region. Everything becomes based from the start of the LPC region, yes. Andrew