On 09:56-20230606, Kumar, Udit wrote:
> On 6/6/2023 2:19 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > On 22:31-20230605, Kumar, Udit wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> > > > index 37c24b077b6a..c13246a9ed8f 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> > [...]
> > > > @@ -639,7 +639,7 @@ &main_i2c6 {
> > > > &wkup_i2c0 {
> > > > status = "okay";
> > > > pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > > - pinctrl-0 = <&wkup_i2c0_pins_default &eeprom_wp_pins_default>;
> > > > + pinctrl-0 = <&wkup_i2c0_pins_default>, <&eeprom_wp_pins_default>;
> > > > clock-frequency = <400000>;
> > > Why we need more than 2 pio lines for i2c node ,
> > pio lines? I am not sure I understand. If you are suggesting
> > eeprom_wp_pins to be moved to the eeprom node, It is probably
> > un-related to this series, but OK, i think it is probably a valid
> > change (unless Robert sees a reason why he did it the way he did).
>
> correct, I am suggesting to move eeprom_wp_pins_default to eeprom node.
>
> i2c needs 2 lines which are defined in wkup_i2c0_pins_default, Adding
> eeprom_wp_pins_default will not be true representation of i2c node.
>
> It will be good to have similar changes in main_i2c1 and main_i2c5 node for
> csi0_gpio_pins_default and csi1_gpio_pins_default.
Robert: your opinion here?
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D
