Add support for Versal and Versal NET SoCs. Both of them should use the
same IP core but differences can be in integration part that's why create
separate compatible strings.
Also describe optional power-domains property. It is optional because power
domain doesn't need to be onwed by non secure firmware hence no access to
control it via any driver.
Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
- Change subject
- Add compatible string for versal and versal NET
- Update commit message to reflect why power domain is optional.
.../devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
index d1f5eb996dba..5652df8ec121 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
@@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ allOf:
properties:
compatible:
- const: xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
+ enum:
+ - xlnx,versal-rtc
+ - xlnx,versal-net-rtc
+ - xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
reg:
maxItems: 1
@@ -48,6 +51,9 @@ properties:
default: 0x198233
deprecated: true
+ power-domains:
+ maxItems: 1
+
required:
- compatible
- reg
--
2.36.1
On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 01:36:34PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> Add support for Versal and Versal NET SoCs. Both of them should use the
> same IP core but differences can be in integration part that's why create
> separate compatible strings.
>
> Also describe optional power-domains property. It is optional because power
> domain doesn't need to be onwed by non secure firmware hence no access to
> control it via any driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Change subject
> - Add compatible string for versal and versal NET
> - Update commit message to reflect why power domain is optional.
>
> .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
> index d1f5eb996dba..5652df8ec121 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
> @@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ allOf:
>
> properties:
> compatible:
> - const: xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
> + enum:
> + - xlnx,versal-rtc
> + - xlnx,versal-net-rtc
> + - xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
You sure chief? I don't see a driver patch alongside this adding these
new versal compatibles there, so should these versal compatibles not
fall back to the zynqmp one?
Thanks,
Conor.
>
> reg:
> maxItems: 1
> @@ -48,6 +51,9 @@ properties:
> default: 0x198233
> deprecated: true
>
> + power-domains:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> required:
> - compatible
> - reg
> --
> 2.36.1
>
On 3/6/24 18:53, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 01:36:34PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>> Add support for Versal and Versal NET SoCs. Both of them should use the
>> same IP core but differences can be in integration part that's why create
>> separate compatible strings.
>>
>> Also describe optional power-domains property. It is optional because power
>> domain doesn't need to be onwed by non secure firmware hence no access to
>> control it via any driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Change subject
>> - Add compatible string for versal and versal NET
>> - Update commit message to reflect why power domain is optional.
>>
>> .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml | 8 +++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
>> index d1f5eb996dba..5652df8ec121 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/xlnx,zynqmp-rtc.yaml
>> @@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ allOf:
>>
>> properties:
>> compatible:
>> - const: xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
>> + enum:
>> + - xlnx,versal-rtc
>> + - xlnx,versal-net-rtc
>> + - xlnx,zynqmp-rtc
>
> You sure chief? I don't see a driver patch alongside this adding these
> new versal compatibles there, so should these versal compatibles not
> fall back to the zynqmp one?
works for me too.
Thanks,
Michal