On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As new users are
> added, it is expected that they will be Device Tree compliant.
> If this is the case, we will look up their initialisation values
> by compatible entry, then apply them forthwith.
(...)
> +static struct nmk_i2c_controller u8500_i2c = {
> + /*
> + * slave data setup time, which is
> + * 250 ns,100ns,10ns which is 14,6,2
> + * respectively for a 48 Mhz
> + * i2c clock
> + */
> + .slsu = 0xe,
> + /* Tx FIFO threshold */
> + .tft = 1,
> + /* Rx FIFO threshold */
> + .rft = 8,
> + /* std. mode operation */
> + .clk_freq = 100000,
> + /* Slave response timeout(ms) */
> + .timeout = 200,
> + .sm = I2C_FREQ_MODE_FAST,
> +};
So why don't we create proper device tree bindings for the above platform
data?
For example several driver under
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/*
define the .clk_freq above as "clock-frequency"
samsung-i2c even has this:
samsung,i2c-sda-delay = <100>;
samsung,i2c-max-bus-freq = <100000>;
Where i2c-sda-delay corresponds to slsu above.
I suspect .sm can be derived from the frequency so it
is "FAST" whenever the frequency > 100000.
This looks to me like a way to push the burden of doing the real
device tree binding for the above to the next user.
(Which will likely be me, so therefore I care a bit ...)
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
