On 24/02/2022 at 19:26, Tudor Ambarus - M18064 wrote:
On 2/24/22 19:44, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Hi Tudor,
Hi,
On 24/02/2022 at 16:49, Tudor Ambarus - M18064 wrote:
On 2/24/22 17:04, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
On 11/01/2022 at 14:05, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
Add NAND support. The sama7g5's SMC IP is the same as sama5d2's with
a slightly change: it provides a synchronous clock output (SMC clock)
that is dedicated to FPGA usage. Since this doesn't interfere with the SMC
NAND configuration, thus code will not be added in the current nand driver
to address the FPGA usage, use the sama5d2's compatible and choose not to
introduce dedicated compatibles for sama7g5.
Tested with Micron MT29F4G08ABAEAWP NAND flash.
Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
The patch depends on the following patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20220111125310.902856-1-tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u
Patch seems taken, so I add this one to at91-dt branch for 5.18 merge window.
I think it depends on who gets to next first. If at91 gets before clk,
there will be a build error, isn't it?
Sorry, not linux-next, but whose PR gets first applied by Linus.
Clk patch is already in linux-next, so no worries.
Moreover, I don't get why there could be a build error as there is no build dependency between DT changes and C changes.
Sorry but I'm puzzled... Or I'm not looking at the right patch.
You would see this kind of error:
Error: arch/arm/boot/dts/sama7g5.dtsi:102.21-22 syntax error
FATAL ERROR: Unable to parse input tree
make[1]: *** [scripts/Makefile.lib:346: arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama7g5ek.dtb] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make: *** [Makefile:1385: dtbs] Error 2
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
This patch uses "PMC_MCK1" which is defined in:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20220111125310.902856-1-tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u
If Linus applies the arm-soc PR before the clk PR, it will see the same error, no?
Yes, absolutely.
So I need to have an immutable branch from Stephen then. I'm removing
the patch from the at91-dt branch for now.
Thanks for the insight and sorry not having overlooked at that crucial
piece of header file ;-)
Best regards,
Nicolas
--
Nicolas Ferre
