[PATCH 12/14] ARM: dts: Introduce STM32F429 MCU

[Maxime Coquelin]

Hi Philipp,

2015-02-13 12:47 GMT+01:00 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel at pengutronix.de>:
> Hi Maxime,
>
> Am Donnerstag, den 12.02.2015, 18:46 +0100 schrieb Maxime Coquelin:
> [...]
>> +     soc {
>> +             reset_ahb1: reset at 40023810 {
>> +                     #reset-cells = <1>;
>> +                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
>> +                     reg = <0x40023810 0x4>;
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             reset_ahb2: reset at 40023814 {
>> +                     #reset-cells = <1>;
>> +                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
>> +                     reg = <0x40023814 0x4>;
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             reset_ahb3: reset at 40023818 {
>> +                     #reset-cells = <1>;
>> +                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
>> +                     reg = <0x40023818 0x4>;
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             reset_apb1: reset at 40023820 {
>> +                     #reset-cells = <1>;
>> +                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
>> +                     reg = <0x40023820 0x4>;
>> +             };
>> +
>> +             reset_apb2: reset at 40023824 {
>> +                     #reset-cells = <1>;
>> +                     compatible = "st,stm32-reset";
>> +                     reg = <0x40023824 0x4>;
>> +             };
>
> These are mostly consecutive, single registers. I wonder if these are
> part of the same IP block and thus should be grouped together into the
> same reset controller node?

What I could to is to have two instances. One for AHB and one for APB domain.
Doing this, I will have one instance per domain, and only consecutive registers.
Is it fine for you?

Thanks,
Maxime

>
> regards
> Philipp
>