>-----Original Message----- >From: Stuart Yoder >Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:26 PM >To: Bhaskar U <bhaskar.upadhaya@xxxxxxx>; Shawn Guo ><shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx> >Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; oss@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Prabhakar Kushwaha ><prabhakar.kushwaha@xxxxxxx>; linux-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Pratiyush >Srivastava <pratiyush.srivastava@xxxxxxx>; linux-arm- >kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/1] arm64: Add DTS support for FSL's LS1012A SoC > >> >> +&qspi { >> >> + num-cs = <2>; >> >> + bus-num = <0>; >> >> + status = "disabled"; >> > >> >Why is it being disabled? >> >> Ok, will change like below. >> status = "okay"; > >The comment was not "change this to okay". The question is why is this disabled? >Can you explain why it was disabled? Should it have been disasbled? Is qspi >working and tested on this board? The intension of putting the status in disabled state is that the qspi functionality is not tested with the up-streamed kernel. Yes qspi is working and tested on this board with 4.1 kernel version. > >> >> > >> >> + fsl,ddr-sampling-point = <4>; >> > >> >I do not find the bindings for this property, neither how driver supports it. >> >> Yes the QSPI DDR mode is not yet up-streamed, so I will remove this property >as of now. >> >> > >> >> + >> >> + qflash0: s25fs512s@0 { >> >> + compatible = "spansion,m25p80"; >> >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> >> + spi-max-frequency = <20000000>; >> >> + m25p,fast-read; >> >> + reg = <0>; >> >> + }; >> >> +}; >> >> + >> >> +&i2c0 { >> >> + status = "okay"; >> >> + >> >> + codec: sgtl5000@a { >> >> + #sound-dai-cells = <0>; >> >> + compatible = "fsl,sgtl5000"; >> >> + reg = <0xa>; >> >> + VDDA-supply = <®_1p8v>; >> >> + VDDIO-supply = <®_1p8v>; >> >> + clocks = <&sys_mclk>; >> >> + }; >> >> +}; >> >> + >> >> +&duart0 { >> >> + status = "okay"; >> >> +}; >> >> + >> >> +&esdhc0 { >> >> + status = "disabled"; >> > >> >We prefer to disable devices which have board level options by >> >default in <soc>.dtsi, and enable them per availability in <board>.dts. >> >> Ok , will make the status as okay i.e. status = "okay"; > >Again, the feedback was not "set this to okay". Why was esdhc0 set to "disabled" >here in the first place? Was there a reason? > >The comment is that if there are certain boards where esdhc0 is not available, >then fsl-ls1012a.dtsi should set this to "disabled" and board .dts files should >override it. esdhc0 is not there on this board so shall we mark the status in disabled state ? > >> > >> >> +}; >> >> + >> >> +&esdhc1 { >> >> + status = "disabled"; >> >> +}; >> >> + >> >> +&sai2 { >> >> + status = "disabled"; >> >> +}; > >Same comment for the above nodes. The fsl-ls1012a.dtsi should set them to >disabled and any .dts file should override with "ok" if applicable. esdhc1 is not there on the board, so shall we keep the status of esdhc1 in disabled state ? sai2 is working and tested on this board, so shall we put the sai2 status as "okay" ? Earlier when we kept sai2 status as disabled, by that time sai2 was not tested but now it is working fine. > >Stuart -- 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