On 12/03/2015 03:51 PM, Vignesh R wrote:
>
>
> On 12/01/2015 10:09 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Vignesh R <vigneshr@xxxxxx> [151130 20:46]:
>>> On 12/01/2015 04:04 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>>>
...
>>
>> OK. They are both on L3 main so that won't cause any issues for separate
>> interconnect driver instances. As they are still separate targets flushing
>> a posted write to one area will not flush anything to the other.
>>
>
> I didn't quite understand what you meant by interconnect driver instance.
> qspi_base and qspi_mmap region are tightly bound to each other and both
> needs to be accessed by ti-qspi driver (though different targets).
> Besides qspi_mmap region is only used to read data, there will not be
> any write accesses to this target. Are you saying this binding is not
> viable?
>
As I stated above qspi_base and qspi_mmap region are tightly bound,
there is no way to use qspi_mmap region w/o accessing qspi_base. So I am
planning to keep them as it is. I will move qspi_ctrlmod to use syscon.
Something like:
qspi: qspi@4b300000 {
compatible = "ti,dra7xxx-qspi";
reg = <0x4b300000 0x100>,
<0x5c000000 0x4000000>,
reg-names = "qspi_base", "qspi_mmap";
syscon-chipselects = <&scm_conf 0x558>;
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
spi-max-frequency = <48000000>;
ti,hwmods = "qspi";
};
Do you think this is not viable in future?
--
Regards
Vignesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
