Am Mittwoch, 3. September 2014, 13:14:54 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> On Wednesday 03 September 2014 10:27:13 Romain Perier wrote:
> > +static const struct emac_rockchip_soc_data emac_rockchip_dt_data[] = {
> > + { .grf_offset = 0x154 }, /* rk3066 */
> > + { .grf_offset = 0x0a4 }, /* rk3188 */
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct of_device_id emac_rockchip_dt_ids[] = {
> > + { .compatible = "rockchip,rk3066-emac", .data =
> > &emac_rockchip_dt_data[0] }, + { .compatible =
> > "rockchip,rk3188-emac", .data = &emac_rockchip_dt_data[1] }, + { /*
> > Sentinel */ }
> > +};
> > +
>
> One last question: is this the location given as .grf_offset the
> only thing in grf that is potentially of concern to this driver?
>
> If it is, you can change the binding to include the register number
> in the syscon reference, like
>
> rockchip,grf = <&grf 0x154>;
>
> and then read it from there, to simplify the code needed to get the
> number from the device id.
I would disagree here :-)
Specific to the emac, there also exists a second register in the grf (0xa8 for
the rk3188) that contains a field
----
emac_newrcv_en - the selection of RMII receive selection
0: don't support the data package without header
1: support the data package without header
----
which we don't handle currently but somebody might want to in the future.
[There also is no documentation of this at all]
The dt maintainers also generally suggest to define compatibles for the
individual socs anyway, even if only one is matched, so I don't see the
necessity to encode this 2 times
compatible = "rockchip,rk3188-emac", "rockchip,rk3066-emac";
rockchip,grf = <&grf 0xa4>;
instead of the more flexible
compatible = "rockchip,rk3188-emac";
rockchip,grf = <&grf>;
which other rockchip drivers already use in this form.
Heiko
--
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
