From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S938522AbcHJT5I (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:57:08 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com ([74.125.82.50]:35236 "EHLO mail-wm0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934893AbcHJT5F (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:57:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 08:34:21 +0000 From: Karl Beldan To: Sekhar Nori Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Mark Rutland , Karl Beldan , Kevin Hilman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Rob Herring , Santosh Shilimkar Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM: dts: da850: Add an aemif node Message-ID: <20160810083421.GD16481@gobelin> References: <20160809171518.22690-1-kbeldan@baylibre.com> <20160809171518.22690-3-kbeldan@baylibre.com> <57AADC63.90405@ti.com> <57AADF7B.1070102@ti.com> <20160810080713.GB16481@gobelin> <57AAE1D1.5080000@ti.com> <20160810082631.GC16481@gobelin> <57AAE5E6.8090304@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57AAE5E6.8090304@ti.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:59:26PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote: > On Wednesday 10 August 2016 01:56 PM, Karl Beldan wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:42:01PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote: > >> On Wednesday 10 August 2016 01:37 PM, Karl Beldan wrote: > >>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 01:32:03PM +0530, Sekhar Nori wrote: > >>>> On Wednesday 10 August 2016 01:18 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday 09 August 2016 10:45 PM, Karl Beldan wrote: > >>>>>> Currently the davinci da8xx boards use the mach-davinci aemif code. > >>>>>> Instantiating an aemif node into the DT allows to use the ti-aemif > >>>>>> memory driver and is another step to better DT support. > >>>>>> Also it will allow to properly pass the emif timings via DT. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Karl Beldan > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi > >>>>>> index bc10e7e..f62928c 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi > >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/da850.dtsi > >>>>>> @@ -411,6 +411,16 @@ > >>>>>> dma-names = "tx", "rx"; > >>>>>> }; > >>>>>> }; > >>>>>> + aemif: aemif@68000000 { > >>>>>> + compatible = "ti,da850-aemif"; > >>>>>> + #address-cells = <2>; > >>>>>> + #size-cells = <1>; > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> + reg = <0x68000000 0x00008000>; > >>>>>> + ranges = <0 0 0x60000000 0x08000000 > >>>>>> + 1 0 0x68000000 0x00008000>; > >>>>>> + status = "disabled"; > >>>>>> + }; > >>>>>> nand_cs3@62000000 { > >>>>>> compatible = "ti,davinci-nand"; > >>>>>> reg = <0x62000000 0x807ff > >>>>> > >>>>> The nand node should be part of aemif node like it is done for keystone > >>>>> boards. > >>>> > >>>> Actually, can you move the nand node out of da850.dtsi completely. Its > >>>> much better to keep da850.dtsi restricted to soc-internal devices and > >>>> keep the board level devices like NAND flash in .dts file. > >>>> > >>>> Similarly, can you move the NAND pinmux definitions too to the > >>>> da850-evm.dts file? > >>>> > >>>> There is advantage in keeping common pinmux definitions in da850.dtsi so > >>>> each board doe not have to repeat them. But AEMIF is an exception as its > >>>> usage can really be varied (NAND, NOR, SRAM, other). Plus, different > >>>> boards are likely to use different chip selects so coming up with some > >>>> pinmux definitions which will be reused widely is really unlikely. > >>>> > >>> This is exactly what I just did for the LCDK. > >>> If everybody is happy with it I will do the same for the evm as I put it > >>> in the cover letter. > >> > >> Yes please. We dont want duplication of data between da850.dtsi and > >> da850-lcdk.dts files. > >> > > Then I'll wait for this series to be applied and then apply my changes > > to the EVM while retiring the nand_cs3 together. > > No, I prefer the fixup happens first. In the same series, you can first > fixup existing EVM and then add LCDK support. > Well in that case you'll have to do the testing since I only have an LCDK. I should be able to send the series within the hour. Karl