Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 11 Oct 2015 19:20:05 +0200 | From | Maxime Ripard <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] ARM: sun5i: Add C.H.I.P DTS |
| |
On Fri, Oct 09, 2015 at 11:22:23PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Maxime Ripard > <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote: > > The C.H.I.P. is a small SBC with an Allwinner R8, 8GB of NAND, 512MB of > > RAM, USB host and OTG, a wifi / bluetooth combo chip, an audio/video jack > > and two connectors to plug additional boards on top of it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> > > Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > > --- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 3 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts | 213 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > > index 342ab3116feb..bf165ed4e7fa 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > > @@ -600,7 +600,8 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN5I) += \ > > sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dtb \ > > sun5i-a13-olinuxino-micro.dtb \ > > sun5i-a13-q8-tablet.dtb \ > > - sun5i-a13-utoo-p66.dtb > > + sun5i-a13-utoo-p66.dtb \ > > + sun5i-r8-chip.dtb > > dtb-$(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I) += \ > > sun6i-a31-app4-evb1.dtb \ > > sun6i-a31-colombus.dtb \ > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..0d450a828372 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-r8-chip.dts > > snip > > > +®_dcdc2 { > > + regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>; > > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1400000>; > > + regulator-name = "cpuvdd"; > > Other boards seem to follow the power pin names on the SoC and call > this "vdd-cpu". > > > + regulator-always-on; > > +}; > > + > > +®_dcdc3 { > > + regulator-min-microvolt = <1000000>; > > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1300000>; > > + regulator-name = "corevdd"; > > And this was named "vdd-int" or "vdd-int-dll" (for SoCs with separate > VDD_DLL pins). > > > + regulator-always-on; > > +}; > > + > > +®_ldo1 { > > + regulator-name = "rtcvdd"; > > And this one was "vdd-rtc". > > I know you followed the names set in the design doc. Just wondering if there > should be some convention on these.
I think if we have a document that clearly reference them with some other name, we should just stick with the name used there, especially if it's only cosmetic, which is the case here.
> > +}; > > + > > +®_ldo2 { > > + regulator-min-microvolt = <2700000>; > > + regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>; > > + regulator-name = "avcc"; > > + regulator-always-on; > > +}; > > + > > +®_ldo5 { > > + regulator-min-microvolt = <1800000>; > > + regulator-max-microvolt = <1800000>; > > + regulator-name = "vcc-1v8"; > > +}; > > + > > +®_usb0_vbus { > > + pinctrl-0 = <&chip_vbus_pin>; > > + vin-supply = <®_vcc5v0>; > > + gpio = <&pio 1 10 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; /* PB10 */ > > status = "okay"; ?
Ah, yes, indeed.
> The rest looks good.
Is that an Ack from you if I add the status ?
Thanks! Maxime
-- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |