lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] arm/dt: tegra devicetree support
    On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 08:37:19AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
    > Grant Likely wrote at Tuesday, July 19, 2011 5:43 PM:
    > > Everything required to populate NVIDIA Tegra devices from the device
    > > tree. This patch adds a new DT_MACHINE_DESC() which matches against
    > > a tegra20 device tree. So far it only registers the on-chip devices,
    > > but it will be refined in follow on patches to configure clocks and
    > > pin IO from the device tree also.
    > >
    > > Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
    > > ---
    > >
    > > Hi all,
    > >
    > > Similar to the versatile patch I just posted, this is certainly not
    > > complete board support, but it is enough to be useful. I'd like to
    > > merge this for v3.1. It should not break any existing board support.
    >
    > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
    >
    > tegra-*.dts don't include status="disable" for all the unused controllers.
    > Should that be added?
    >
    > > + sound {
    > > + compatible = "nvidia,harmony-sound", "nvidia,tegra-wm8903";
    >
    > I thought the sound bindings were still somewhat experimental and not
    > completely agreed upon. One issue I see is that Device Tree is
    > supposed to represent pure HW, rather than driver-required abstractions,
    > and at least the compatible name here is pretty Linux-driver-specific.
    >
    > I think there are some devices missing from the DT file for audio too,
    > e.g. the ALSA "PCM" (DMA) driver.
    >
    > Also, the bindings for this aren't documented IIRC.
    >
    > I'd suggest dropping the audio part of the DT file until the audio side
    > is more mature.
    >
    > > + spkr-en-gpios = <&codec 2 0>;
    >
    > Should that be "gpio" not "gpios", since there is only one?
    >
    My reason for using "gpios" over "gpio" is that
    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio.txt says so. Unless you
    want to change the document to elaborate the difference between "gpio"
    and "gpios", which I do not see the necessity ...

    GPIO properties should be named "[<name>-]gpios".

    Regards,
    Shawn



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2011-07-21 00:45    [W:0.025 / U:1.360 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site