On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 06:06:41PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote : > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Alexandre Belloni > <alexandre.belloni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Maybe it is not completely related but I think it needs to be thought > > about while you are it: > > > > The TI wilink chips (TiWi, wl12xx, wl18xx) have wifi on SDIO and BT on > > UART but they share the same clock. So, the next question would be what > > if I just want to enable one or the other (and take that decision at > > runtime) ? > > Some Broadcom chips (BCM4329/4330) and the AP6210 found on CubieTruck > are like this as well. In our case, the SD/MMC host driver hasn't been > mainlined yet. But BT on UART is independent and usable. > > > Where do I put the pinctrl/clocks/regulators in the DT ? I guess it can > > become an issue to enable both WiFi and BT at the same time if both SDIO > > and UART are trying to handle the same pinctrl and regulators. > > Shouldn't the clocks and regulators be registered in the DT _AS_ clocks > and regulators? fixed-regulator already accepts GPIO lines. fixed-rate-clock > mentions GPIOs in DT bindings, but doesn't seem to use them in the code. > We'd still need a device to tie them to, especially in the UART use case. > Yeah, I meant if you tie your clock/pinctrl/reset/regulator to both the BT and the WiFI nodes because it is shared, you'll at least get a warning or one of the two won't be working. > Or we could try rfkill devices. Not saying it's the correct way, but it is > a solution. > You'll get the same issue there. Two rfkill devices sharing the same clock or reset for example. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
