+If an RSC needs to program next wake-up in the PDC timer, it must specify theI don't understand this whole binding. Why can't the pdc timer be
+binding as child node with the following properties:
+
+Properties:
+- compatible:
+ Usage: required
+ Value type: <string>
+ Definition: must be "qcom,pdc-timer".
+
+- reg:
+ Usage: required
+ Value type: <prop-encoded-array>
+ Definition: Specifies the offset of the control register.
+
Example 1:
For a TCS whose RSC base address is is 0x179C0000 and is at a DRV id of 2, the
@@ -103,6 +123,9 @@ TCS-OFFSET: 0xD00
<0x179d0000 0x10000>,
<0x179e0000 0x10000>;
reg-names = "drv-0", "drv-1", "drv-2";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <1>;
+ ranges;
interrupts = <GIC_SPI 3 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 4 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
<GIC_SPI 5 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
@@ -112,6 +135,12 @@ TCS-OFFSET: 0xD00
<SLEEP_TCS 3>,
<WAKE_TCS 3>,
<CONTROL_TCS 1>;
+
+ pdc_timer@38 {
+ compatible = "qcom,pdc-timer";
+ reg = <0x38 0x1>,
+ <0x40 0x1>;
programmed within the rpmh driver? This looks like a node is being added
as a child just to make a platform driver and device match up in the
linux kernel. And that in turn causes a regmap to need to be created?
Sorry, it just looks really bad.