From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] ARM: dts: at91: at91-sama5d27_som1: add sama5d27 SoM1 support Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 17:29:52 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1499086572-6083-1-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com> <1499086572-6083-5-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@microchip.com> <20170705152343.b735on6edg3vfsp3@rfolt0960.corp.atmel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170705152343.b735on6edg3vfsp3@rfolt0960.corp.atmel.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Claudiu Beznea , alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, sza@esh.hu, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, cristian.birsan@microchip.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 05/07/2017 at 17:23, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2017 at 03:56:11PM +0300, Claudiu Beznea wrote: >> Add specific DTS file and bindings for sama5d27 SoM1 board. >> >> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea >> Signed-off-by: Cristian Birsan >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1.dtsi | 178 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 178 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1.dtsi >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1.dtsi >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..c3a1dc8 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1.dtsi > > [...] > >> + >> + i2c0: i2c@f8028000 { >> + dmas = <0>, <0>; >> + pinctrl-names = "default"; >> + pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_i2c0_default>; >> + i2c-sda-hold-time-ns = <350>; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + >> + 24aa@50 { >> + compatible = "24mac602"; >> + reg = <0x50>; >> + pagesize = <8>; >> + start-offset = /bits/ 8 <0xf8>; > > Are you sure about the offset? I thought it was 0xfa but maybe I am > wrong. Moreover, as the binding for this is not yet accepted I would advice to remove this part for now. It will be easier for synchronization with i2c eeprom. Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre