Re: [PATCH v2 6/8] arm64: dts: renesas: r9a09g057: Add WDT0-WDT3 nodes

From: Lad, Prabhakar
Date: Mon Aug 12 2024 - 08:32:32 EST


Hi Biju,

On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 1:25 PM Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2024 9:50 PM
> > Subject: [PATCH v2 6/8] arm64: dts: renesas: r9a09g057: Add WDT0-WDT3 nodes
> >
> > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add WDT0-WDT3 nodes to RZ/V2H(P) ("R9A09G057") SoC DTSI.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v1->v2
> > - New patch
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi
> > index 435b1f4e7d38..7f4e8ad9b0a5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r9a09g057.dtsi
> > @@ -184,6 +184,17 @@ scif: serial@11c01400 {
> > status = "disabled";
> > };
> >
> > + wdt0: watchdog@11c00400 {
> > + compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-wdt";
> > + reg = <0 0x11c00400 0 0x400>;
> > + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 75>,
> > + <&cpg CPG_MOD 76>;
> > + clock-names = "pclk", "oscclk";
> > + resets = <&cpg 117>;
> > + power-domains = <&cpg>;
> > + status = "disabled";
> > + };
> > +
> > ostm4: timer@12c00000 {
> > compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-ostm", "renesas,ostm";
> > reg = <0x0 0x12c00000 0x0 0x1000>;
> > @@ -224,6 +235,28 @@ ostm7: timer@12c03000 {
> > status = "disabled";
> > };
> >
> > + wdt2: watchdog@13000000 {
> > + compatible = "renesas,r9a09g057-wdt";
> > + reg = <0 0x13000000 0 0x400>;
> > + clocks = <&cpg CPG_MOD 79>,
> > + <&cpg CPG_MOD 80>;
> > + clock-names = "pclk", "oscclk";
> > + resets = <&cpg 119>;
> > + power-domains = <&cpg>;
> > + status = "disabled";
> > + };
>
> I guess same group(all wdt together) arranged together?? Not sure.
>
I think Geert prefers it to be sorted based on unit address. So I'll
let Geert make a decision on this (and the rest of the similar patches
where nodes are sorted based on unit address and not grouped based on
IP).

Cheers,
Prabhakar