Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] da850: pruss SUART board specific additions.

[Subhasish Ghosh]

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael Williamson" <michael.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:56 PM
To: "Subhasish Ghosh" <subhasish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <davinci-linux-open-source@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
<sachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Russell King" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; 
"Kevin Hilman" <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "open list" 
<linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <m-watkins@xxxxxx>; 
<linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] da850: pruss SUART board specific additions.

> Hi Subhasish,
>
> On 2/11/2011 9:51 AM, Subhasish Ghosh wrote:
>
> > This patch adds the pruss SUART pin mux and registers the device
> > with the pruss mfd driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Subhasish Ghosh <subhasish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c |   36 
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c 
> > b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c
> > index f9c38f8..3858516 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c
> > @@ -1060,6 +1060,25 @@ const short da850_evm_pruss_can_pins[] = {
> >  -1
> >  };
> >
> > +const short da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins[] = {
> > + DA850_AHCLKX, DA850_ACLKX, DA850_AFSX,
> > + DA850_AHCLKR, DA850_ACLKR, DA850_AFSR,
> > + DA850_AXR_13, DA850_AXR_9, DA850_AXR_7,
> > + DA850_AXR_14, DA850_AXR_10, DA850_AXR_8,
> > + -1
> > +};
> > +
>
>
> Shouldn't this pins select PRU[0,1]_XXX type functions and not McASP 
> functions?
> E.G.: PRU0_R31[17] instead of AHCLKX, PRU0_R31[18] instead of AHCLKR, etc.

SG - The Soft-UART implementation uses the McASP as shift registers to push 
out the data sequentially.
           Hence, we configure the McASP PINS and not the PRU PINS.

> > +static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart(void)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = davinci_cfg_reg_list(da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins);
> > + if (ret)
> > + pr_warning("%s: da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins "
> > + "mux setup failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_can(void)
> >  {
> >  int ret, val = 0;
> > @@ -1085,6 +1104,17 @@ static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_can(void)
> >  return ret;
> >  }
> >
> > +static struct da850_evm_pruss_suart_data suart_data = {
> > + .version = 1,
> > + .resource = {
> > + .name = "da8xx_mcasp0_iomem",
> > + .start = DAVINCI_DA8XX_MCASP0_REG_BASE,
> > + .end = DAVINCI_DA8XX_MCASP0_REG_BASE +
> > + (SZ_1K * 12) - 1,
> > + .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > + },
> > +};
> > +
> >  static struct da8xx_pruss_can_data can_data = {
> >  .version = 1,
> >  };
> > @@ -1094,6 +1124,12 @@ static struct da8xx_pruss_devices pruss_devices[] 
> > = {
> >  .dev_name = "da8xx_pruss_can",
> >  .pdata = &can_data,
> >  .pdata_size = sizeof(can_data),
> > + .setup = da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart,
>
>
> Should this be da850_evm_setup_pruss_can instead?

SG - This just the way the patch is displayed. In the code the order is 
correct.

> > + },
> > + {
> > + .dev_name = "da8xx_pruss_uart",
> > + .pdata = &suart_data,
> > + .pdata_size = sizeof(suart_data),
> >  .setup = da850_evm_setup_pruss_can,
>
>
> Should this be da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart instead?
SG - Ditto
> >  },
> >  {
>
>
> -Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/