[U-Boot] [PATCH v5 05/11] exynos: dts: Adjust device tree files for U-Boot

[Tom Rini]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 02:46:02PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> On 4 August 2014 09:54, Tom Rini <trini at ti.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2014 at 06:01:58AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> Hi Tom,
> >>
> >> On 30 July 2014 09:34, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> >> > Hi Tom,
> >> >
> >> > On 28 July 2014 21:27, Tom Rini <trini at ti.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 06:11:32AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> The pinctrl bindings used by Linux are an incomplete description of the
> >> >>> hardware. It is possible in most cases to determine the register address
> >> >>> of each, but not in all cases. By adding an additional property we can
> >> >>> fix this, and avoid adding a table to U-Boot for every single Exynos
> >> >>> SOC.
> >> >>
> >> >> So here's my fear..
> >> >>
> >> >> [snip]
> >> >>> @@ -49,7 +57,7 @@
> >> >>>       i2c at 12ca0000 {
> >> >>>               #address-cells = <1>;
> >> >>>               #size-cells = <0>;
> >> >>> -             compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i27c";
> >> >>> +             compatible = "samsung,s3c2440-i2c";
> >> >>>               reg = <0x12CA0000 0x100>;
> >> >>>               interrupts = <0 60 0>;
> >> >>>       };
> >> >>
> >> >> Except for the above (what's going on? pulling in a typo fix from
> >> >> upstream?) they're legal "regular" non-U-Boot-prefixed changes.  Are
> >> >> they going back into the master copy in Linux?
> >> >
> >> > Oops I missed this email. The typo is just my mistake - we don't need
> >> > this change and the typo is in the previous patch.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dtsi
> >> >>> index b3e63d1..df31f37 100644
> >> >>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dtsi
> >> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/exynos5420-pinctrl.dtsi
> >> >>> @@ -13,6 +13,18 @@
> >> >>>  */
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  / {
> >> >>> +     /* Replicate the ordering of arch/arm/include/asm/arch-exynos/gpio.h */
> >> >>> +     pinctrl at 14010000 {
> >> >>> +     };
> >> >>> +     pinctrl at 13400000 {
> >> >>> +     };
> >> >>> +     pinctrl at 13410000 {
> >> >>> +     };
> >> >>> +     pinctrl at 14000000 {
> >> >>> +     };
> >> >>> +     pinctrl at 03860000 {
> >> >>> +     };
> >> >>
> >> >> So this isn't going to head back to Linux, clearly...
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there some way we can contain our changes under includes perhaps?
> >> >
> >> > I hope that this one could go away, since the order of GPIOs doesn't
> >> > ultimately matter. At present we assume a particular order due to the
> >> > numbering of GPIOs. But once we move to named GPIOs in the device tree
> >> > we can drop this ordering patch.
> >> >
> >> > In general, yes we could create a new include file for the U-Boot
> >> > device tree additions.
> >>
> >> Update: I took a look at the includes. I can create a new file, like
> >> arch/arm/dts/exynos4210-pinctrl.dtsi which I include from
> >> arch/arm/dts/exynos4210.dtsi. But I think I will still need to modify
> >> arch/arm/dts/exynos4210.dtsi. The alternative is to put the changes in
> >> something like exynos4210-u-boot.dtsi and include those in every board
> >> file that uses that include.
> >
> > With arch/arm/dts/exynos4210-pinctrl.dtsi + arch/arm/dts/exynos4210.dtsi
> > the modification to the later is just to include the former, right?  I'm
> > OK with that.
> 
> Almost, but we still need the #address-cells and #size-cells
> properties in the pinctrl nodes.

And these, as you said I think, are HW description things that should be
included in the master DT file upstream, right?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20140805/f3f74849/attachment.pgp>