>From: Lee Jones [mailto:lee.jo...@linaro.org] >Sent: 07 March 2014 03:32 > >> From: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensou...@diasemi.com> >> >> This patch updates the register definitions for DA9063 to support the >> production silicon variant code ID (0x5). These changes are not backwards >> compatible with the previous register definitions and can only be used >> with the production variant of DA9063. >> >> Signed-off-by: Opensource [Steve Twiss] <stwiss.opensou...@diasemi.com> >> --- >> Checks performed with next-20140306/scripts/checkpatch.pl >> registers.h total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 1032 lines checked >> >> A brief summary of the changes include: >> >> - Introduction of a new DA9063_REG_ALARM_S register (now appearing at >> addr=0x46) allowing alarm second resolutions and which causes a shift >> in the register map for the RTC registers; >> - Two new configuration registers DA9063_REG_CONFIG_M/N at 0x112 & 0x113; >> - Modified register ranges for MON_REG_[1-6] which now appears at the >> addr=0x114 onwards; >> - New register addresses for the general purpose registers GP_ID_[0-19] >> (now appearing at 0x121 onwards); >> - Renaming of some definitions to match our hardware design conventions; >> - There are also some bit-pattern additions that define some functionality >> alterations of the registers. One notable addition is: >> DA9063_BUCK_SLOWSTART can also be found in the CONTROL_B register and >> enables a BUCK slow start (reduced inrush current; increased startup >> time); >> >> This patch applies against kernel version linux-next next-20140306 >> >> include/linux/mfd/da9063/registers.h | 120 >> ++++++++++++++++++---------------- >> 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-) > >What's the difference between this patch and the one you sent 2 days >ago? >
Hi Lee, There's no difference in the patch for the registers.h. I resent the whole patch set and renamed it from RFC to PATCH after making the changes requested by Alessandro in the RTC driver. Regards, Steve
