RE: [PATCH RFC 1/2] PCI: imx6: enable pcie on imx6qdl sabresd and sabreauto

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Lucas:
Thanks for your quickly review-comments.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucas Stach [mailto:l.stach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 5:36 PM
> To: Zhu Richard-R65037
> Cc: linux-pci-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] PCI: imx6: enable pcie on imx6qdl sabresd and
> sabreauto
> 
> Am Montag, den 22.09.2014, 17:01 +0800 schrieb Richard Zhu:
> > - enable pcie support on imx6qdl sabresd and asbreauto boards.
> > - sabresd board has the pcie power on and reset gpios, but sabreauto
> > doesn't have these two gpios.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Zhu <r65037@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabreauto.dtsi | 4 ++++
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabresd.dtsi   | 2 ++
> >  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabreauto.dtsi
> > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabreauto.dtsi
> > index 009abd6..d6040a5 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabreauto.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabreauto.dtsi
> > @@ -410,6 +410,10 @@
> >  	};
> >  };
> >
> > +&pcie {
> > +	status = "okay";
> > +};
> > +
> >  &pwm3 {
> >  	pinctrl-names = "default";
> >  	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_pwm3>;
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabresd.dtsi
> > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabresd.dtsi
> > index ec43dde..c2d3224 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabresd.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sabresd.dtsi
> > @@ -396,6 +396,7 @@
> >
> >  		pinctrl_pcie: pciegrp {
> >  			fsl,pins = <
> > +				MX6QDL_PAD_EIM_D19__GPIO3_IO19	0x80000000
> >  				MX6QDL_PAD_GPIO_17__GPIO7_IO12	0x80000000
> >  			>;
> >  		};
> > @@ -502,6 +503,7 @@
> >  &pcie {
> >  	pinctrl-names = "default";
> >  	pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_pcie>;
> > +	power-on-gpio = <&gpio3 19 0>;
> >  	reset-gpio = <&gpio7 12 0>;
> >  	status = "okay";
> >  };
> 
> This hunk is wrong. There is no "power-on-gpio" in the binding anymore.
> Also there is already a change in Shawns tree to model this as a always-on
> regulator. If we really want to control pci bus power this needs to be done
> through this regulator, not some arbitrary gpio hack.
> 
> Also I don't see why this would be stable material.
[Richard] Yes, it is. The "power-on-gpio" is not required anymore, would be removed.
Stable kernel mail-list would be removed too.
> 
> Regards,
> Lucas
> --
> Pengutronix e.K.             | Lucas Stach                 |
> Industrial Linux Solutions   | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]