Hi,
Am 25.05.2017 um 19:29 schrieb Joshua Clayton:
> Add support for Altera V FPGA connected to an spi port
Did you mean "Altera Cyclone V"?
> to the evi devicetree file
>
> Signed-off-by: Joshua Clayton <stillcompiling@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-evi.dts | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-evi.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-evi.dts
> index 24fe093a66db..a0cbb2d84803 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-evi.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6q-evi.dts
> @@ -82,6 +82,15 @@
> pinctrl-names = "default";
> pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_ecspi1 &pinctrl_ecspi1cs>;
> status = "okay";
> +
> + fpga_spi: cyclonespi@0 {
"cyclonespi" does not strike me as the best node name.
I am guessing this is a sub-node of a SPI controller node, so no need to
repeat "spi", and Cyclone seems more or less implied by "altr,fpga-".
Note that the example in the bindings doc uses "evi-fpga-spi". Nodes
don't need to be (shouldn't be?) prefixed with the board. Note that
bindings examples tend to get copied a lot.
Any reason not to just use "fpga@0" in both places for simplicity?
> + compatible = "altr,fpga-passive-serial";
> + spi-max-frequency = <20000000>;
> + reg = <0>;
> + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_fpgaspi>;
> + nconfig-gpios = <&gpio4 9 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> + nstat-gpios = <&gpio4 11 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
> + };
> };
>
> &ecspi3 {
[snip]
Regards,
Andreas
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
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
