Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 09 Dec 2019 10:02:02 +0100 | From | Michael Walle <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: ls1028a: fix reboot node |
| |
Am 2019-12-09 04:47, schrieb Shawn Guo: > On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 01:07:09AM +0100, Michael Walle wrote: >> The reboot register isn't located inside the DCFG controller, but in >> its >> own RST controller. Fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc> >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi | 8 +++++++- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi >> index 72b9a75976a1..dc75534a4754 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi >> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ >> >> reboot { >> compatible ="syscon-reboot"; >> - regmap = <&dcfg>; >> + regmap = <&rst>; >> offset = <0xb0>; >> mask = <0x02>; >> }; >> @@ -161,6 +161,12 @@ >> big-endian; >> }; >> >> + rst: syscon@1e60000 { >> + compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-rst", "syscon"; > > Compatible "fsl,ls1028a-rst" seems undocumented?
it is the same with fsl,ls1028a-scfg and fsl,ls1028a-dcfg. So maybe I should just drop the "fsl,ls1028a-rst". What do you think?
-michael
> > Shawn > >> + reg = <0x0 0x1e60000 0x0 0x10000>; >> + little-endian; >> + }; >> + >> scfg: syscon@1fc0000 { >> compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-scfg", "syscon"; >> reg = <0x0 0x1fc0000 0x0 0x10000>; >> -- >> 2.20.1 >>
| |