2018-03-01 15:03 GMT+01:00 Mark Rutland <[email protected]>:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2018 at 02:58:05PM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>> Extended TrustZone Protection driver is very basic and only needs
>> to know where are the registers (no clock, no interrupt)
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> .../bindings/arm/stm32/st,stm32mp1-etzpc.txt | 25
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/st,stm32mp1-etzpc.txt
>>
>> diff --git
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/st,stm32mp1-etzpc.txt
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/st,stm32mp1-etzpc.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..9407e37f7d15
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/stm32/st,stm32mp1-etzpc.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
>> +STMicroelectronics STM32 Extended TrustZone Protection driver
>> +
>> +Required properties:
>> + - compatible : value should be "st,stm32mp1-etzpc"
>> + - reg : physical base address of the IP registers and length of memory
>> + mapped region.
>> + - protected-devices: list of phandle of devices protected by etzpc.
>> + Because etzpc driver rely on the phandle index in
>> + the list, holes must be filled with a disabled node.
>
> ... where the index corresponds to what, exactly?
to the offset of the status bits in the register
>
> Padding with a disabled node seems very hacky.
If a device node doesn't exist in the DT I need to fill the hole by something
to keep the index valid.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
>> +
>> +Example for stm32mp1:
>> +
>> +reserved: disabled_node {
>> + status = "disabled";
>> +};
>> +
>> +etzpc: etzpc@5c007000 {
>> + compatible = "st,stm32mp1-etzpc";
>> + reg = <0x5c007000 0x400>;
>> + protected-devices = <&usart1>,
>> + <&spi6>,
>> + <&i2c4>,
>> + <&reserved>,
>> + <&rng1>;
>> +};
>> --
>> 2.15.0
>>
