Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] ARM: sun5i: Add C.H.I.P DTS

[Maxime Ripard]

On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:22:23PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Maxime Ripard
> <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The C.H.I.P. is a small SBC with an Allwinner R8, 8GB of NAND, 512MB of
> > RAM, USB host and OTG, a wifi / bluetooth combo chip, an audio/video jack
> > and two connectors to plug additional boards on top of it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile          |   3 +-
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts | 213 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> > index 342ab3116feb..bf165ed4e7fa 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> > @@ -600,7 +600,8 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I) += \
> >         sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dtb \
> >         sun5i-a13-olinuxino-micro.dtb \
> >         sun5i-a13-q8-tablet.dtb \
> > -       sun5i-a13-utoo-p66.dtb
> > +       sun5i-a13-utoo-p66.dtb \
> > +       sun5i-r8-chip.dtb
> >  dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I) += \
> >         sun6i-a31-app4-evb1.dtb \
> >         sun6i-a31-colombus.dtb \
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..0d450a828372
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts
> 
> snip
> 
> > +&reg_dcdc2 {
> > +       regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>;
> > +       regulator-max-microvolt = <1400000>;
> > +       regulator-name = "cpuvdd";
> 
> Other boards seem to follow the power pin names on the SoC and call
> this "vdd-cpu".
> 
> > +       regulator-always-on;
> > +};
> > +
> > +&reg_dcdc3 {
> > +       regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>;
> > +       regulator-max-microvolt = <1300000>;
> > +       regulator-name = "corevdd";
> 
> And this was named "vdd-int" or "vdd-int-dll" (for SoCs with separate
> VDD_DLL pins).
> 
> > +       regulator-always-on;
> > +};
> > +
> > +&reg_ldo1 {
> > +       regulator-name = "rtcvdd";
> 
> And this one was "vdd-rtc".
> 
> I know you followed the names set in the design doc. Just wondering if there
> should be some convention on these.

I think if we have a document that clearly reference them with some
other name, we should just stick with the name used there, especially
if it's only cosmetic, which is the case here.

> > +};
> > +
> > +&reg_ldo2 {
> > +       regulator-min-microvolt = <2700000>;
> > +       regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
> > +       regulator-name = "avcc";
> > +       regulator-always-on;
> > +};
> > +
> > +&reg_ldo5 {
> > +       regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>;
> > +       regulator-max-microvolt = <1800000>;
> > +       regulator-name = "vcc-1v8";
> > +};
> > +
> > +&reg_usb0_vbus {
> > +       pinctrl-0 = <&chip_vbus_pin>;
> > +       vin-supply = <&reg_vcc5v0>;
> > +       gpio = <&pio 1 10 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* PB10 */
> 
>           status = "okay"; ?

Ah, yes, indeed.

> The rest looks good.

Is that an Ack from you if I add the status ?

Thanks!
Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature