On Wednesday 10 December 2014 17:43:33 Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> So, there's bluetooth chip that's connected to the SoC by UART and some
> GPIOs. What would be right representation in the device tree?
> Something like this?
>
> bluetooth {
> compatible = "broadcom,bcm2048";
> uart = <&uart2>;
> reset-gpios = <&gpio3 27 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* want 91 */
> host-wakeup-gpios = <&gpio4 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* want 101 */
> bluetooth-wakeup-gpios = <&gpio2 5 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* want 37 */
> chip-type = >;
> bt-sysclk = <2>;
> reset-gpio-shared = <0>;
> };
>
> Is there some way to prevent OMAP tty driver from binding to the
> device and exporting the device to userspace?
I think from the driver perspective, you want this to be a tty line
discipline rather than a driver that attaches to the physical
uart.
For the DT representation, I fear we haven't got a precedent. A uart
phandle sounds reasonable, but there might be other ways to do it
and we should consider if there are better alternatives. It could
possibly be a child node of the uart, but that would require other
infrastructure in the kernel because we don't currently create
devices for those.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
