Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx> hat am 27. Februar 2017 um 21:56 geschrieben: >> >> >> Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > According to the firmware DT blob [1] the RPi 3 uses different >> > pins for i2c0 and pwm. >> > >> > [1] - https://github.com/raspberrypi/firmware/blob/master/extra/dt-blob.dts >> > >> > Fixes: 9d56c22a7861 ("ARM: bcm2835: Add devicetree for the Raspberry Pi 3.") >> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> >> >> Interesting. The dt-blob does, I think, basically reflect the state >> that the pins will be in when the firmware hands off to us. Note that >> the firmware also, at boot, sets ID_SDA/SCL to function 0 (i2c0), probes >> for a HAT ROM and saves it, then restores those pins to whatever mux >> they had before (presumably the dt-blob pin_config values). >> >> Linux doesn't have any HAT probing code itself, so leaving pins 0/1 as >> GPIO input (most boards) or i2c0 (rev2) should be fine. I think this >> patch should effectively be a no-op, unless you've enabled the pwm node. >> >> My only suggestion for change is: These pin configurations are >> board-specific, so could we just move them into the specific board >> files, instead? > > Yes, that would be better. In case of pin configurations do you mean > only those affected by this patch or all pin configurations? I was just thinking about the ones you're changing in this patch. >> Basically leave bcm2835-rpi.dtsi as the "generic >> configuration of bcm283x for the rpi firmware" rather than "things >> common to bcm2835/6 with rpi firmware but not bcm2837 with rpi >> firmware". > > If this our intension, shouldn't we rename it to bcm283x-rpi.dtsi? That sounds good to me.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
