On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 9:01 AM David Summers <beagleboard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Thanks Rob, > > I'll hopefully make those changes this weekend, and resubmit - just so > next weekend can move onto the device tree. > > Oh yes, on the "-bluetooth" or "-bt"; as these devices have both and > sdio input for wifi, and uart for bluetooth; I guess they will need to > be listed twice in a device tree, both under uart and sdio. Now as both > these parts of the device tree will want to specify the driver used, and > the driver is different for bluetooth and for wifi - doesn't that mean > we should specify compatible differently? Otherwise how will the kernel > know which driver to load for wifi and which for bluetooth? > > So question is am I missing something here, and this could be simplified? The compatibles don't really have to be different as the drivers will only bind based on the bus interface. But keeping a '-bt' suffix is fine. > > On the interrupts, GPIO control lines, power supplies, etc, on the ASUS > code that I'm basing the patches on (for Tinker Board S) - these bits > are freestanding in the device tree, and mainly go in with the wifi > patch (and not bluetooth). I'll put some though into how this is best > arranged when going mainline. I think if I'm honest, if I wait to get > all these extras in the documentation, this will only get settled when I > get the wifi into the device tree - as problem is more natural there. > This though would delay the bluetooth patch probably a month. I'd prefer > to get something out there - even if I have to return later to tidy the > documentation. At least for all the combo chips to date, the BT and WiFi halves are pretty much independent. So we can get away with describing them separately. If there's a shared supply or clock then we can list them in both nodes and ref counting makes it all work fine. However, if you had for example, a single firmware image for both BT and WiFi, then we'd want to represent this as a single device (and driver with child drivers). So you need to know if there's any issue like this because that would affect how we do the BT binding. Rob > > Regards, and thanks for the helpful comments. > > David. > > > On 11/01/2019 16:34, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 04:35:37PM +0000, David Summers wrote: > >> This adds the desrciption file that describes the hooks for the > >> realtek bluetooth serial devices, as needed to refer to the interface > >> in the device tree. > > Please follow conventions for patch subjects. 'git log --oneline > > --no-merges -- path/to/file' usually gives a good clue. In this case, > > something like: > > > > dt-bindings: net: Add Realtek serial bluetooth binding > > > >> Signed-off-by: David Summers <beagleboard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> .../bindings/net/realtek-bluetooth-serial.txt | 28 +++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+) > >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/realtek-bluetooth-serial.txt > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/realtek-bluetooth-serial.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/realtek-bluetooth-serial.txt > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 000000000000..0aabca1fc002 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/realtek-bluetooth-serial.txt > >> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ > >> +Realtek bluetooth devices connected via a UART > >> + > >> +- compatible: should be "realtek,<name>-bluetooth" > >> + except for "realtek,trl8761atv" - which only has a serial bluetooth connection > >> + "realtek,rtl8723as-bluetooth" > >> + "realtek,rtl8723bs-bluetooth" > >> + "realtek,rtl8723ds-bluetooth" > >> + "realtek,rtl8761atv" > >> + "realtek,rtl8821as-bluetooth" > >> + "realtek,rtl8821cs-bluetooth" > >> + "realtek,rtl8822bs-bluetooth" > > Arguably, '-bluetooth' is not necessary as nothing else is attached to > > the serial port. At least shorten it to '-bt'. > > > >> +- These device are bluetooth devices, that connect via a uart > > s/device/devices/ > > > >> +- all devices (except for rtl8761atv) are also wifi devices, this is connected > >> + seperatly via sdio - and is not covered by this compatible node > > Really, this should be up above the property list in a description of > > the device(s). > > > >> +- ideally these will be referenced in a device tree serial node via serdev > > Not ideally, but it is only valid for this to be a child of a UART. > > > > serdev is a kernel thing, and shouldn't be part of the binding doc. > > > >> + http://events17.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/serdev-elce-2017-2.pdf > > Useful, but again, not part of this binding. > > > > There's no interrupts, GPIO control lines, power supplies, etc. for > > these chips? The binding should be complete even if your platform > > doesn't need these. > > > >> + > >> +Example: > >> + > >> +&uart0 { > >> + status = "okay"; > > Don't show status in examples. > > > >> + pinctrl-0 = <&uart0_xfer>, <&uart0_cts>; > >> + bluetooth { > >> + compatible = "realtek,rtl8723bs-bluetooth"; > >> + }; > > Mixed tabs and spaces. Use tabs. > > > >> +}; > >> + > >> +this ensures that the bluetooth device is tied to the correct uart > >> -- > >> beagleboard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
