From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?=) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 11:16:51 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: i.MX53: enable spi support In-Reply-To: References: <1294821324-5688-1-git-send-email-yong.shen@freescale.com> <1294821324-5688-2-git-send-email-yong.shen@freescale.com> <20110112093710.GD24920@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20110112101651.GF24920@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:03:27PM +0800, Yong Shen wrote: > hi Uwe, > > >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D16__GPIO_3_16 IOMUX_PAD(0x460, 0x118,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D17__GPIO_3_17 IOMUX_PAD(0x464, 0x11C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D18__GPIO_3_18 IOMUX_PAD(0x468, 0x120,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D16__CSPI1_SCLK IOMUX_PAD(0x460, 0x118,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x79c, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D17__CSPI1_MISO IOMUX_PAD(0x464, 0x11C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x7a0, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D18__CSPI1_MOSI IOMUX_PAD(0x468, 0x120,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x7a4, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> ?#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D20__GPIO_3_20 ? ? ? ? ?IOMUX_PAD(0x470, 0x128,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL) > >> ?#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D21__GPIO_3_21 ? ? ? ? ?IOMUX_PAD(0x474, 0x12C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL) > > Why do you remove the GPIO definitions? > > > Why not? Anyway they are always used as cspi signals. always as in "on the machines currently supported by mainline"? This can change. > IMO, we don't > need keep that many configures, and it's better to add them when > needed. This proved to not work nicely. Better generate the complete header using your excel sheet. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |