Re: [RFC v2 03/17] dt-bindings: timer: Document Owl timer

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 03:40:07PM +0100, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 24.02.2017 um 04:40 schrieb Andreas Färber:
> > The Actions Semi S500 SoC contains a timer block with two timers.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  v2: new
> >  
> >  .../devicetree/bindings/timer/actions,owl-timer.txt      | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/actions,owl-timer.txt
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/actions,owl-timer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/actions,owl-timer.txt
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..141bc7b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/actions,owl-timer.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> > +Actions Semi Owl Timer
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible :  "actions,owl-timer"
> > +- reg        :  Offset and length of the register set for the device.
> > +- interrupts :  Should contain two timer interrupts.
> > +
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > +		timer@b0168000 {
> > +			compatible = "actions,owl-timer";
> > +			reg = <0xb0168000 0x100>;
> > +			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 10 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > +			             <GIC_SPI 11 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > +		};
> 
> I need to modify these bindings for upcoming v3 in the following ways:
> 
> * "actions,s500-timer", "actions,owl-timer" to deal with S500 vs. S900
> differences while keeping a single driver registration (or would two
> registrations be preferred, dropping the second compatible? they do
> share a common subset)

The former is fine.

> 
> * Use named interrupts to deal with 2x 2Hz + 2x Timer vs. 4x Timer for
> complete hardware description

The compatible should imply this difference.

Rob