On 06/28/2015 03:38 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Le 06/27/15 15:08, Rafał Miłecki a écrit :
>> On 24 June 2015 at 01:51, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Enable the use of UART0 by overriding its default status property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-smartrg-sr400ac.dts | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-smartrg-sr400ac.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-smartrg-sr400ac.dts
>>> index d6a033b97c70..64a5e8ab65e0 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-smartrg-sr400ac.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-smartrg-sr400ac.dts
>>> @@ -118,3 +118,7 @@
>>> };
>>> };
>>> };
>>> +
>>> +&uart0 {
>>> + status = "okay";
>>> +};
>>
>> We have many more changes like this in OpenWrt, I just didn't upstream
>> them because of current chipcommonA state.
>>
>> It was added before we got "brcm,bus-axi" and I believe Hauke wanted
>> move it to the "correct" place at some point. Since UART is part of
>> ChipCommon device and ChipCommon is part of "brcm,bus-axi",.I guess we
>> should add UARTs as a ChipCommon device subnodes. We already have
>> chipcommon: chipcommon@0 {
>> reg = <0x00000000 0x1000>;
>>
>> gpio-controller;
>> #gpio-cells = <2>;
>> };
>> , is it possible to move UARTs there?
I added it at the beginning of the port so I have serial, even without
adding support for bcma. I haven't look at that part later, but it
should go into the chipcommon part. Thats for the patches.
>>
>> I'm not sure if this UART cleanup should block your change. I guess it
>> depends on the way it'll finally look like.
>
> I do not think it will, see below:
>
>>
>> I'm also wondering: is there any preference between overwriting status
>> with something like
>> &uart0 { };
>> and
>> chipcommonA {
>> uart0: serial@0300 { };
>> };
>> ? I don't know DT that well, just asking.
>
> An alias can be located pretty much anywhere in the DTS as long as the
> name is unique, which is why I took this approach, because I do not have
> to do something like this and need to know the full depth of the tree:
>
> foo0 {
> bar0 {
> baz0 {
> status = "okay";
> };
> };
> };
>
> This is both more compact, and more robust to re-parenting the UART0
> node in case you ever wanted to do it in the future.
>
> I will happily fix the other DTSes to use that convention if we agree
> this is the route to take.
I haven't used that earlier because I did not know of this feature. I
think Rafał already did or is currently doing this steps.
Hauke
--
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
