Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 06/29] mtd: Add support for reading MTD devices via the nvmem API | From | Srinivas Kandagatla <> | Date | Tue, 21 Aug 2018 10:50:07 +0100 |
| |
On 20/08/18 19:20, Boris Brezillon wrote: > On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 11:43:34 +0100 > Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> wrote: > >> >> Overall am still not able to clear visualize on how MTD bindings with >> nvmem cells would look in both partition and un-partition usecases? >> An example DT would be nice here!! > > Something along those lines: > This looks good to me. > mtdnode { > nvmem-cells { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > cell@0 { > reg = <0x0 0x14>; > }; > }; > > partitions { > compatible = "fixed-partitions"; > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > partition@0 { > reg = <0x0 0x20000>; > > nvmem-cells { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <1>; > > cell@0 { > reg = <0x0 0x10>; > }; > }; > }; > }; > }; >
Just curious...Is there a reason why we can't do it like this?: Is this because of issue of #address-cells and #size-cells Or mtd bindings always prefer subnodes?
mtdnode { reg = <0x0123000 0x40000>; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>; cell@0 { compatible = "nvmem-cell"; reg = <0x0 0x14>; };
partitions { compatible = "fixed-partitions"; #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <1>;
partition@0 { reg = <0x0 0x20000>; cell@0 { compatible = "nvmem-cell"; reg = <0x0 0x10>; }; }; }; };
Am okay either way!
thanks, srini
| |