From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Fedin Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/4] Documentation: dt-bindings: Describe SROMc configuration Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:58:03 +0300 Message-ID: <00a101d112e0$537a18e0$fa6e4aa0$@samsung.com> References: <56330E6E.50003@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.12]:42178 "EHLO mailout2.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757901AbbJ3G6I (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:58:08 -0400 In-reply-to: <56330E6E.50003@samsung.com> Content-language: ru Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: 'Rob Herring' , 'Pawel Moll' , 'Mark Rutland' , 'Ian Campbell' , 'Kumar Gala' , 'Kukjin Kim' Hello! > > Add documentation for new subnode properties, allowing bank configuration. > > Based on u-boot implementation, but heavily reworked. > > Please, carefully look at: > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/gpmc-eth.txt > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt Thank you very much. Indeed, this looks very similar. By the way, should i document smsc over sromc in the same manner, writing devicetree/bindings/net/sromc-eth.txt? This is a short reply for now, i'll make longer one (or just a new version) after studying these existing bindings and trying to apply them. Pankaj: > > +&sromc { > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&srom_ctl>, <&srom_ebi>; > > + > > + ethernet@07000000 { > > + compatible = "smsc,lan9115"; > > + reg = <0x07000000 0x10000>; > > + phy-mode = "mii"; > > + interrupt-parent = <&gpx0>; > > + interrupts = <5 8>; > > + reg-io-width = <2>; > > + smsc,irq-push-pull; > > + smsc,force-internal-phy; > > + > > + samsung,srom-bank = <3>; > > + samsung,srom-data-width = <2>; > > + samsung,srom-timing = <1 9 12 1 9 1 1>; > > I think this is not correct. We can't change binding of "smsc,lan9115" > which is already documented here [1]. These samsung specific srom > properties should be in srom node or its subnode, but not in this way. So, if you look at gpmc-eth.txt, you'll see that this approach is perfectly valid (this is a reply to another msg, just don't want to post one more single-line reply). Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: p.fedin@samsung.com (Pavel Fedin) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 09:58:03 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v4 1/4] Documentation: dt-bindings: Describe SROMc configuration In-Reply-To: <56330E6E.50003@samsung.com> References: <56330E6E.50003@samsung.com> Message-ID: <00a101d112e0$537a18e0$fa6e4aa0$@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello! > > Add documentation for new subnode properties, allowing bank configuration. > > Based on u-boot implementation, but heavily reworked. > > Please, carefully look at: > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/gpmc-eth.txt > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt Thank you very much. Indeed, this looks very similar. By the way, should i document smsc over sromc in the same manner, writing devicetree/bindings/net/sromc-eth.txt? This is a short reply for now, i'll make longer one (or just a new version) after studying these existing bindings and trying to apply them. Pankaj: > > +&sromc { > > + pinctrl-names = "default"; > > + pinctrl-0 = <&srom_ctl>, <&srom_ebi>; > > + > > + ethernet at 07000000 { > > + compatible = "smsc,lan9115"; > > + reg = <0x07000000 0x10000>; > > + phy-mode = "mii"; > > + interrupt-parent = <&gpx0>; > > + interrupts = <5 8>; > > + reg-io-width = <2>; > > + smsc,irq-push-pull; > > + smsc,force-internal-phy; > > + > > + samsung,srom-bank = <3>; > > + samsung,srom-data-width = <2>; > > + samsung,srom-timing = <1 9 12 1 9 1 1>; > > I think this is not correct. We can't change binding of "smsc,lan9115" > which is already documented here [1]. These samsung specific srom > properties should be in srom node or its subnode, but not in this way. So, if you look at gpmc-eth.txt, you'll see that this approach is perfectly valid (this is a reply to another msg, just don't want to post one more single-line reply). Kind regards, Pavel Fedin Expert Engineer Samsung Electronics Research center Russia