Re: [PATCH] ARM: berlin: add SPI nodes for BG2Q

From: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Date: Wed May 20 2015 - 12:58:46 EST


On 20.05.2015 14:53, Antoine Tenart wrote:
The BG2Q SoC has two SPI controllers. Add the corresponding nodes.

Signed-off-by: Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---

Based on top of the Berlin clock rework series.

arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi
index 187d056f7ad2..c25ee86b2bfa 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/berlin2q.dtsi
@@ -286,6 +286,20 @@
status = "disabled";
};

+ spi0: spi@1c00 {
+ compatible = "snps,dw-apb-ssi";
+ reg = <0x1c00 0x100>;
+ interrupt-parrent = <&aic>;

Antoine,

the same question as for the ADC node patch: IIRC you don't have
to repeat the interrupt-parent property as long as any node upstream
will have it already.

+ interrupts = <7>;
+ clocks = <&chip_clk CLKID_CFG>;
+ pinctrl-0 = <&spi0_pmux>;
+ pinctrl-names = "default";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+ num-cs = <4>;
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
timer0: timer@2c00 {
compatible = "snps,dw-apb-timer";
reg = <0x2c00 0x14>;
@@ -383,6 +397,11 @@
groups = "G7";
function = "twsi1";
};
+
+ spi0_pmux: spi0-pmux {
+ groups = "G8", "G9", "G10", "G11";
+ function = "spi1";

Hmm, "spi0_pmux" but "spi1" function?

+ };
};

chip_rst: reset {
@@ -473,6 +492,20 @@
};
};

+ spi1: spi@5000 {
+ compatible = "snps,dw-apb-ssi";
+ reg = <0x6000 0x100>;
+ interrupt-parent = <&sic>;
+ interrupts = <5>;
+ clocks = <&refclk>;
+ pinctrl-0 = <&spi1_pmux>;
+ pinctrl-names = "default";
+ #address-cells = <1>;
+ #size-cells = <0>;
+ num-cs = <4>;
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
i2c2: i2c@7000 {
compatible = "snps,designware-i2c";
#address-cells = <1>;
@@ -564,6 +597,11 @@
groups = "GSM14";
function = "twsi3";
};
+
+ spi1_pmux: spi1-pmux {
+ groups = "GSM0", "GSM1", "GSM2", "GSM3";
+ function = "spi2";

ditto.

I know the internal numbering scheme on BG-SoCs is weird, but it looks like that either you are missing the third SPI or there is only 2 and
numbering starts with 1 *sigh* ;)

Anyway, the numbering should be consistent with pinctrl function names
although I would have preferred to start counting with 0.

Sebastian

+ };
};
};



--
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/