[RESPIN 1/6] dt-bindings: EXYNOS: Add exynos-srom device tree binding

[pankaj.dubey]

Hi

On Wednesday 02 March 2016 11:23 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 02:03:37PM +0530, Pankaj Dubey wrote:
>> This patch adds exynos-srom binding information for SROM Controller
>> driver on Exynos SoCs.
>>
>> CC: Rob Herring <robh+dt at kernel.org>
>> CC: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
>> CC: Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree at hellion.org.uk>
>> CC: devicetree at vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey at samsung.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski at samsung.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Kukjin Kim <kgene at kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski at samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.txt   | 12 ++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.txt
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..33886d5
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
>> +SAMSUNG Exynos SoCs SROM Controller driver.
>> +
>> +Required properties:
>> +- compatible : Should contain "samsung,exynos-srom".
> 
> There should be SoC specific compatible strings in addition to this.
> 

I do not understood need of additional SoC specific compatible here. As
of now all SoCs having SROM can work with exynos specific common
compatible. Do you see any issues if we do not have SoC specific
compatible here.

>> +
>> +- reg: offset and length of the register set
>> +
>> +Example:
>> +	sromc at 12570000 {
> 
> This should be memory-controller at ...
> 
>> +		compatible = "samsung,exynos-srom";
>> +		reg = <0x12570000 0x10>;
> 
> The next patch changes the size to 0x14?
> 
> BTW, you could just combine both patches. I guess you didn't to maintain 
> authorship?
> 

OK. Will squash both of these patches, unless Pavel do not have any
objections to this.

Thanks,
Pankaj Dubey

> Rob
> 
>