From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ipaton0@gmail.com (Iain Paton) Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 15:16:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: imx6: add new board RIoTboard In-Reply-To: <20140509120845.GO2794@dragon> References: <53695C34.5000604@gmail.com> <20140508054106.GH2794@dragon> <536B4ACD.30001@gmail.com> <20140509030938.GK2794@dragon> <536C8837.9090802@gmail.com> <20140509120845.GO2794@dragon> Message-ID: <536CE331.7030001@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 09/05/14 13:08, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 08:48:07AM +0100, Iain Paton wrote: >> On 09/05/14 04:09, Shawn Guo wrote: >>> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 10:13:49AM +0100, Iain Paton wrote: >> >>>> +&ecspi1 { >>>> + fsl,spi-num-chipselects = <1>; >>>> + cs-gpios = <&gpio5 17 0>; >>>> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_ecspi1>; >>>> + status = "okay"; >>>> + >>>> + spidev at 0 { >>>> + spi-max-frequency = <24000000>; >>>> + reg = <0>; >>>> + compatible = "spidev"; >>>> + }; >>> >>> What's this? Is this the common way we code spi devices in device tree? >> >> I'd appreciate your guidance here, what would you prefer? >> >> My reasons for adding spidev were as follows: >> >> 1. The SPI pins are not used on the board, they go to an expansion header. >> 2. Board is targeted at makers who are likely to want to attach >> external devices. >> 3. Experience has been that if they don't find an easy and already >> configured way to use something they reach for devmem2 or similar. >> 4. devicetree is often seen as being too hard by people who come to these >> boards from things like arduino >> >> I've already had questions on how to find the physical address of /dev/i2c-0 >> seemingly due to some of the above. >> >> I'm happy to drop the spidev entries if that's what you'd prefer, but if I >> do that I'm undecided if I should then just drop the ecspi sections as well >> and free up more gpio pins on the expansion header for other uses. > > You can decide if you want to drop or keep the ecspi sections. I prefer > to drop those spidev nodes, before we're not sure this is the right way > to go. I'll likely drop them then. Am I ok to leave the pin groups in the iomuxc when nothing uses them, or would you prefer I only include what's actually being used ?