| Message ID | 1242806865-2334-1-git-send-email-w.sang@pengutronix.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Delegated to: | Grant Likely |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:07 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: > Add a node for the i2c eeprom and delete the superflous gpio-example. > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> > Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> > Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > --- > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts | 26 ++++---------------------- > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts > index 8958347..33ce488 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts > +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts > @@ -258,34 +258,16 @@ > compatible = "nxp,pcf8563"; > reg = <0x51>; > }; > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ > + eeprom@52 { > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; > + reg = <0x52>; > + }; Grant suggested this earlier... eeprom@52 { compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; reg = <0x52>; }; > }; > > sram@8000 { > compatible = "fsl,mpc5200b-sram","fsl,mpc5200-sram"; > reg = <0x8000 0x4000>; > }; > - > - /* This is only an example device to show the usage of gpios. It maps all available > - * gpios to the "gpio-provider" device. > - */ > - gpio { > - compatible = "gpio-provider"; > - > - /* mpc52xx exp.con patchfield */ > - gpios = <&gpio_wkup 0 0 /* GPIO_WKUP_7 11d jp13-3 */ > - &gpio_wkup 1 0 /* GPIO_WKUP_6 14c */ > - &gpio_wkup 6 0 /* PSC2_4 43c x5-11 */ > - &gpio_simple 2 0 /* IRDA_1 24c x7-6 set GPS_PORT_CONFIG[IRDA] = 0 */ > - &gpio_simple 3 0 /* IRDA_0 x8-5 set GPS_PORT_CONFIG[IRDA] = 0 */ > - &gpt2 0 0 /* timer2 12d x4-4 */ > - &gpt3 0 0 /* timer3 13d x6-4 */ > - &gpt4 0 0 /* timer4 61c x2-16 */ > - &gpt5 0 0 /* timer5 44c x7-11 */ > - &gpt6 0 0 /* timer6 60c x8-15 */ > - &gpt7 0 0 /* timer7 36a x17-9 */ > - >; > - }; > }; > > pci@f0000d00 { > -- > 1.6.2 > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >
> > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ > > + eeprom@52 { > > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; > > + reg = <0x52>; > > + }; > > Grant suggested this earlier... > eeprom@52 { > compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; > reg = <0x52>; > }; Can you give me a pointer? I just found this thread http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/2008-July/000008.html but not the result you proposed. Regards, Wolfram
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: >> > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ >> > + eeprom@52 { >> > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; >> > + reg = <0x52>; >> > + }; >> >> Grant suggested this earlier... >> eeprom@52 { >> compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; >> reg = <0x52>; >> }; > > Can you give me a pointer? I just found this thread Grant, what do you want here? > http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/2008-July/000008.html > > but not the result you proposed. > > Regards, > > Wolfram > > -- > Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | > Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkoUJ4oACgkQD27XaX1/VRsSbwCgo1o//DG1wjKGR7BY1lkRxOAi > 8kIAoJghKuhKMNBDXUhA4sWj/vRfDoDV > =Bmoy > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:10:59PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: > >> > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ > >> > + eeprom@52 { > >> > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; > >> > + reg = <0x52>; > >> > + }; > >> > >> Grant suggested this earlier... > >> eeprom@52 { > >> compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; > >> reg = <0x52>; > >> }; > > > > Can you give me a pointer? I just found this thread > > > Grant, what do you want here? I fear an answer like: "a properly working at24" ;)
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:10:59PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: >> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: >> >> > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ >> >> > + eeprom@52 { >> >> > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; >> >> > + reg = <0x52>; >> >> > + }; >> >> >> >> Grant suggested this earlier... >> >> eeprom@52 { >> >> compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; >> >> reg = <0x52>; >> >> }; >> > >> > Can you give me a pointer? I just found this thread >> >> >> Grant, what do you want here? > > I fear an answer like: "a properly working at24" ;) > BWAHAHAHAHA! g.
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 10:15 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: >> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:10:59PM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: >>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> wrote: >>> >> > - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ >>> >> > + eeprom@52 { >>> >> > + compatible = "at24,24c32"; >>> >> > + reg = <0x52>; >>> >> > + }; >>> >> >>> >> Grant suggested this earlier... >>> >> eeprom@52 { >>> >> compatible = "atmel,24c32", "eeprom"; >>> >> reg = <0x52>; >>> >> }; >>> > >>> > Can you give me a pointer? I just found this thread >>> >>> >>> Grant, what do you want here? >> >> I fear an answer like: "a properly working at24" ;) >> > > BWAHAHAHAHA! Now that I've got that out of the way... As the other thread states, "eeprom" is far too vague, and it is certainly not documented, and does not say anything meaningful about the protocol used to talk to the eeprom. Sure, most i2c eeproms use the same protocol, but an assumption cannot be made that that will always be the case. Plus, the namespace will collide with non-i2c eeproms. "i2c-eeprom" is better, but not great. Before a value like "i2c-eeprom" can be acceptable, it must be documented and reviewed as to exactly what it means, and even then I'm uncomfortable with it. However, on the other point, Jon is correct. The first value in the list should be "atmel,24c32", not "at24,24c32". Cheers, g.
> As the other thread states, "eeprom" is far too vague, and it is > certainly not documented, and does not say anything meaningful about > the protocol used to talk to the eeprom. Sure, most i2c eeproms use > the same protocol, Not at all! Pretty much every size of 24c has its own protocol; and some manufacturers have special extensions for locking parts of the array, etc. A driver can ignore that last part, but not the first. So the SEEPROM size should be part of its "compatible" name; simplest way for that is to use the model number. > but an assumption cannot be made that that will > always be the case. Plus, the namespace will collide with non-i2c > eeproms. "i2c-eeprom" is better, but not great. Before a value like > "i2c-eeprom" can be acceptable, it must be documented and reviewed as > to exactly what it means, and even then I'm uncomfortable with it. > > However, on the other point, Jon is correct. The first value in the > list should be "atmel,24c32", not "at24,24c32". Yeah. So perhaps "atmel,24c32","24c32" ? I'm not terribly happy with that last name, but these devices are _very_ common. Segher
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: >> However, on the other point, Jon is correct. The first value in the >> list should be "atmel,24c32", not "at24,24c32". > > Yeah. So perhaps "atmel,24c32","24c32" ? I'm not terribly happy > with that last name, but these devices are _very_ common. I don't think the last name is necessary at all. I'd leave it at "atmel,24c32". non-atmel parts can claim compatibility with the atmel version if really necessary. I don't like the 'generic' version either. g.
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts index 8958347..33ce488 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts @@ -258,34 +258,16 @@ compatible = "nxp,pcf8563"; reg = <0x51>; }; - /* FIXME: EEPROM */ + eeprom@52 { + compatible = "at24,24c32"; + reg = <0x52>; + }; }; sram@8000 { compatible = "fsl,mpc5200b-sram","fsl,mpc5200-sram"; reg = <0x8000 0x4000>; }; - - /* This is only an example device to show the usage of gpios. It maps all available - * gpios to the "gpio-provider" device. - */ - gpio { - compatible = "gpio-provider"; - - /* mpc52xx exp.con patchfield */ - gpios = <&gpio_wkup 0 0 /* GPIO_WKUP_7 11d jp13-3 */ - &gpio_wkup 1 0 /* GPIO_WKUP_6 14c */ - &gpio_wkup 6 0 /* PSC2_4 43c x5-11 */ - &gpio_simple 2 0 /* IRDA_1 24c x7-6 set GPS_PORT_CONFIG[IRDA] = 0 */ - &gpio_simple 3 0 /* IRDA_0 x8-5 set GPS_PORT_CONFIG[IRDA] = 0 */ - &gpt2 0 0 /* timer2 12d x4-4 */ - &gpt3 0 0 /* timer3 13d x6-4 */ - &gpt4 0 0 /* timer4 61c x2-16 */ - &gpt5 0 0 /* timer5 44c x7-11 */ - &gpt6 0 0 /* timer6 60c x8-15 */ - &gpt7 0 0 /* timer7 36a x17-9 */ - >; - }; }; pci@f0000d00 {
Add a node for the i2c eeprom and delete the superflous gpio-example. Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de> Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org --- arch/powerpc/boot/dts/pcm030.dts | 26 ++++---------------------- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)