Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754155AbbERQHB (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2015 12:07:01 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:34968 "EHLO mail-wg0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754103AbbERQGx (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2015 12:06:53 -0400 Message-ID: <555A0E19.10807@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 18:06:49 +0200 From: Sebastian Hesselbarth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 To: Antoine Tenart , jic23@kernel.org, knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net CC: zmxu@marvell.com, jszhang@marvell.com, yrliao@marvell.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] ARM: berlin: add an ADC node for the BG2Q References: <1431940760-23896-1-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> <1431940760-23896-4-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> In-Reply-To: <1431940760-23896-4-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1409 Lines: 48 On 18.05.2015 11:19, Antoine Tenart wrote: > This patch adds the ADC node for the Berlin BG2Q, using the newly added > Berlin IIO ADC driver. > > Signed-off-by: Antoine Tenart > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi > index 187d056f7ad2..97c7e19e3ec6 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi > @@ -565,6 +565,13 @@ > function = "twsi3"; > }; > }; > + > + adc: adc { > + compatible = "marvell,berlin2-adc"; > + interrupt-parent = <&sic>; Antoine, a side note on the interrupt-parent property above: The parent simple-bus node already contains that property. If you remove the property here, don't the interrupt routines go up the hierarchy until they find an interrupt-parent set? So, is it safe to get rid of the extra interrupt-parent property on the adc node? Sebastian > + interrupts = <12>, <14>; > + interrupt-names = "adc", "tsen"; > + }; > }; > > sic: interrupt-controller@e000 { > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/