Hi,
On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Arun,
>
>
> On 24.04.2014 06:17, Arun Kumar K wrote:
>>
>> Adds the google peach-pit board dts file which uses
>> exynos5420 SoC.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Arun Kumar K <arun.kk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Changes from v1
>> ---------------
>> - Addressed review comments from Doug, Sachin & Tushar
>> - Removed adc and lid-switch nodes
>> ---
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 +
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts | 182
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 183 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
>> index 35c146f..3220e29 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
>> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS) += exynos4210-origen.dtb \
>> exynos5250-smdk5250.dtb \
>> exynos5250-snow.dtb \
>> exynos5420-arndale-octa.dtb \
>> + exynos5420-peach-pit.dtb \
>> exynos5420-smdk5420.dtb \
>> exynos5440-sd5v1.dtb \
>> exynos5440-ssdk5440.dtb
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..fbb0469
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts
>> @@ -0,0 +1,182 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Google Peach Pit Rev 6+ board device tree source
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (c) 2014 Google, Inc
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>> + */
>> +
>> +/dts-v1/;
>> +#include <dt-bindings/input/input.h>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
>> +#include "exynos5420.dtsi"
>> +
>> +/ {
>> + model = "Google Peach Pit Rev 6+";
>> +
>> + compatible = "google,pit-rev16",
>> + "google,pit-rev15", "google,pit-rev14",
>> + "google,pit-rev13", "google,pit-rev12",
>> + "google,pit-rev11", "google,pit-rev10",
>> + "google,pit-rev9", "google,pit-rev8",
>> + "google,pit-rev7", "google,pit-rev6",
>> + "google,pit", "google,peach","samsung,exynos5420",
>> + "samsung,exynos5";
>
>
> Do you really need so many compatible strings here? Furthermore, are all the
> newer revisions really fully backwards compatible with older ones?
>
> Also, do you have a way to check the revision in hardware, e.g. by some GPIO
> pins? If so, I don't think there would be any need to revision number as a
> part of compatible string.
>
>
>> +
>> + memory {
>> + reg = <0x20000000 0x80000000>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + fixed-rate-clocks {
>> + oscclk {
>> + compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-oscclk";
>> + clock-frequency = <24000000>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + pinctrl@13400000 {
>
>
> Please convert this dts file into reference-based syntax. It has multiple
> advantages over the legacy way of replicating full paths every time a node
> needs to be updated.
>
> You can see other dts files for examples how this can be used, e.g.
> s3c64*.dts* (for a quite simple setup), imx6*.dts* (for more complex
> things), etc.
>
>
>> + tpm_irq: tpm-irq {
>> + samsung,pins = "gpx1-0";
>> + samsung,pin-function = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + power_key_irq: power-key-irq {
>> + samsung,pins = "gpx1-2";
>> + samsung,pin-function = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + pinctrl@14010000 {
>> + spi_flash_cs: spi-flash-cs {
>> + samsung,pins = "gpa2-5";
>> + samsung,pin-function = <1>;
>> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-drv = <3>;
>> + };
>> +
>> + backlight_pwm: backlight-pwm {
>> + samsung,pins = "gpb2-0";
>> + samsung,pin-function = <2>;
>> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>;
>> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + gpio-keys {
>> + compatible = "gpio-keys";
>> +
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&power_key_irq>;
>> +
>> + power {
>> + label = "Power";
>> + gpios = <&gpx1 2 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>> + linux,code = <KEY_POWER>;
>> + gpio-key,wakeup;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + rtc@101E0000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + };
>> +
>> + serial@12C30000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + };
>> +
>> + mmc@12200000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + num-slots = <1>;
>> + broken-cd;
>> + caps2-mmc-hs200-1_8v;
>> + supports-highspeed;
>> + non-removable;
>> + card-detect-delay = <200>;
>> + clock-frequency = <400000000>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-ciu-div = <3>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-sdr-timing = <0 4>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-ddr-timing = <0 2>;
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&sd0_clk &sd0_cmd &sd0_bus4 &sd0_bus8>;
>> +
>> + slot@0 {
>> + reg = <0>;
>> + bus-width = <8>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + mmc@12220000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + num-slots = <1>;
>> + supports-highspeed;
>> + card-detect-delay = <200>;
>> + clock-frequency = <400000000>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-ciu-div = <3>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-sdr-timing = <2 3>;
>> + samsung,dw-mshc-ddr-timing = <1 2>;
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&sd2_clk &sd2_cmd &sd2_cd &sd2_bus4>;
>> +
>> + slot@0 {
>> + reg = <0>;
>> + bus-width = <4>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + i2c@12E10000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + clock-frequency = <400000>;
>> +
>> + tpm@20 {
>> + /* Unused irq; but still need to configure the
>> pins */
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&tpm_irq>;
>
>
> nit: Please move the pinctrl properties below compatible and reg, as this is
> more readable and consistent with other nodes.
>
>
>> +
>> + compatible = "infineon,slb9645tt";
>> + reg = <0x20>;
>> + };
>> + };
>> +
>> + spi@12d30000 {
>> + status = "okay";
>> + samsung,spi-src-clk = <0>;
>> + num-cs = <1>;
>> +
>> + spidev@0 {
>> + compatible = "spidev";
>> + reg = <0>;
>> + spi-max-frequency = <50000000>;
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&spi_flash_cs>;
>> +
>> + controller-data {
>> + cs-gpio = <&gpa2 5 0>;
>> + samsung,spi-feedback-delay = <2>;
>> + };
>
>
> Hmm, is this really a physical device? Shouldn't this have some kind of real
> compatible string first? Also I'm not even sure if "spidev" is supposed to
> be used like this, especially considering that this compatible string isn't
> even documented in Documentation/devicetree/bindings. (Rob, Mark, Grant, any
> opinions on this?)
>
Since not much inputs are received on this, I can drop this node for now so that
rest of the stuff gets in. I will post an updated patchset addressing
other comments.
Regards
Arun
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
--
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
