From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com (Antoine Tenart) Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 10:59:06 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: berlin: add SPI nodes for BG2Q In-Reply-To: <555CBD3B.1000809@gmail.com> References: <1432126385-27402-1-git-send-email-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> <555CBD3B.1000809@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20150525085905.GB29660@kwain> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Sebastian, On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:58:35PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > 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 > >--- > > > >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 at 1c00 { > >+ compatible = "snps,dw-apb-ssi"; > >+ reg = <0x1c00 0x100>; > >+ interrupt-parrent = <&aic>; > > 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. You're right, I'll remove this. And we have other nodes doing the same thing, I'll cook up a patch to remove non mandatory interrupt-parent properties. > > >+ 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 at 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? Yep. See below. > >+ }; > > }; > > > > chip_rst: reset { > >@@ -473,6 +492,20 @@ > > }; > > }; > > > >+ spi1: spi at 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 at 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* ;) There are 2 SPI, starting at 1... :) > Anyway, the numbering should be consistent with pinctrl function names > although I would have preferred to start counting with 0. OK, so we'll have spi1_pmux in the spi0 node. I'll update. Antoine -- Antoine T?nart, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com