From: plagnioj@jcrosoft•com (Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: introduce SAMA5 support
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 13:35:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130311123533.GA2001@game.jcrosoft.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGhQ9Vzjhg+js-yQ_E3dLRi7Cc6ZCSiRVhVp_hAtiXob+EKxdg@mail.gmail.com>
On 22:27 Fri 08 Mar , Joachim Eastwood wrote:
> On 8 March 2013 19:56, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
> <plagnioj@jcrosoft•com> wrote:
> > On 18:18 Fri 08 Mar , Joachim Eastwood wrote:
> >> On 8 March 2013 17:52, Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel•com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> >>
> >> >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-sama5.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-sama5.c
> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> > index 0000000..705305e
> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/board-dt-sama5.c
> >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,86 @@
> >> >> > +/*
> >> >> > + * Setup code for SAMA5 Evaluation Kits with Device Tree support
> >> >> > + *
> >> >> > + * Copyright (C) 2013 Atmel,
> >> >> > + * 2013 Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel•com>
> >> >> > + *
> >> >> > + * Licensed under GPLv2 or later.
> >> >> > + */
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/init.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/module.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/gpio.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/micrel_phy.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/of.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> >> >> > +#include <linux/phy.h>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +#include <asm/setup.h>
> >> >> > +#include <asm/irq.h>
> >> >> > +#include <asm/mach/arch.h>
> >> >> > +#include <asm/mach/map.h>
> >> >> > +#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +#include "at91_aic.h"
> >> >> > +#include "generic.h"
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +static const struct of_device_id irq_of_match[] __initconst = {
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + { .compatible = "atmel,sama5d3-aic", .data = at91_aic5_of_init },
> >> >> > + { /*sentinel*/ }
> >> >> > +};
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +static void __init at91_dt_init_irq(void)
> >> >> > +{
> >> >> > + of_irq_init(irq_of_match);
> >> >> > +}
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +static int ksz9021rn_phy_fixup(struct phy_device *phy)
> >> >> > +{
> >> >> > + int value;
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +#define GMII_RCCPSR 260
> >> >> > +#define GMII_RRDPSR 261
> >> >> > +#define GMII_ERCR 11
> >> >> > +#define GMII_ERDWR 12
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + /* Set delay values */
> >> >> > + value = GMII_RCCPSR | 0x8000;
> >> >> > + phy_write(phy, GMII_ERCR, value);
> >> >> > + value = 0xF2F4;
> >> >> > + phy_write(phy, GMII_ERDWR, value);
> >> >> > + value = GMII_RRDPSR | 0x8000;
> >> >> > + phy_write(phy, GMII_ERCR, value);
> >> >> > + value = 0x2222;
> >> >> > + phy_write(phy, GMII_ERDWR, value);
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + return 0;
> >> >> > +}
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +static void __init sama5_dt_device_init(void)
> >> >> > +{
> >> >> > + if (of_machine_is_compatible("atmel,sama5d3xcm"))
> >> >> > + phy_register_fixup_for_uid(PHY_ID_KSZ9021, MICREL_PHY_ID_MASK,
> >> >> > + ksz9021rn_phy_fixup);
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + of_platform_populate(NULL, of_default_bus_match_table, NULL, NULL);
> >> >> > +}
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +static const char *sama5_dt_board_compat[] __initdata = {
> >> >> > + "atmel,sama5",
> >> >> > + NULL
> >> >> > +};
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +DT_MACHINE_START(sama5_dt, "Atmel SAMA5 (Device Tree)")
> >> >> > + /* Maintainer: Atmel */
> >> >> > + .init_time = at91sam926x_pit_init,
> >> >> > + .map_io = at91_map_io,
> >> >> > + .handle_irq = at91_aic5_handle_irq,
> >> >> > + .init_early = at91_dt_initialize,
> >> >> > + .init_irq = at91_dt_init_irq,
> >> >> > + .init_machine = sama5_dt_device_init,
> >> >> > + .dt_compat = sama5_dt_board_compat,
> >> >> > +MACHINE_END
> >> >>
> >> >> Do we really need board-dt-sama5.c?
> >> >> Now that we have both irqchip_init and clocksource_of_init it
> >> >> shouldn't be necessary with more than one board-dt.c.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > At the beginning, I had the same point of view but we have a new
> >> > architecture, we can't build a single kernel image for both AT91SAM9 and
> >> > SAMA5. So why not splitting it?
> >>
> >> It does add more lines to mach-at91 and I don't see a reason to have
> >> two near identical board-dt files. board-dt could be used for SAMA5
> >> even without irqchip_init and clocksource_of_init so what's the point
> >> in splitting it?
> >>
> >> When the at91 clocksource and irqchip driver are converted/moved we
> >> could support all AT91 SoC from RM9200 to SAMA5 in one board-dt. I
> >> don't see the reason for 3 board-dt files or even 2.
> >>
> >> That we can't build a kernel that supports both ARMv4-5 and ARMv7
> >> doesn't make a difference.
> > my answer is no I do not want to if compatible_is on the c code so no
> > different files
>
> But you have this already on the above code:
> >> >> > + if (of_machine_is_compatible("atmel,sama5d3xcm"))
>
> I don't see the point to have different board-dt files.
> If a board turns out to need lots of specific C code to work I think
> it's fine to have it in its own board file. But right now you are just
> duplicating code unnecessary.
sorry my mind is made NACK
I do want one file per core rm9200/sama9 sama5
no compatible_is and mutilple MACHINE_xx in the same file
Best Regards,
J.
> regards
> Joachim Eastwood
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-11 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-08 15:13 [PATCH 0/4] SAMA5D3 support ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-08 15:13 ` [PATCH 1/4] ARM: at91: add AT91_SAM9_TIME entry to select at91sam926x_time.c compilation ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-08 15:13 ` [PATCH 2/4] ARM: at91: introduce the core type choice to split ARMv4/5 and ARMv7 arch ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-08 15:58 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-08 15:13 ` [PATCH 3/4] ARM: at91: fix infinite loop in at91_irq_suspend/resume ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-08 15:58 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-13 9:21 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-08 15:13 ` [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: introduce SAMA5 support ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-08 16:40 ` Joachim Eastwood
2013-03-08 16:52 ` Ludovic Desroches
[not found] ` <513a1756.e94aec0a.1f22.6694SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2013-03-08 17:18 ` Joachim Eastwood
2013-03-08 18:56 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
2013-03-08 21:27 ` Joachim Eastwood
2013-03-11 12:35 ` Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD [this message]
2013-03-13 14:35 ` Nicolas Ferre
2013-03-08 18:00 ` [PATCH 0/4] SAMA5D3 support Robert Nelson
2013-03-11 11:15 ` Ludovic Desroches
[not found] ` <513dbd6d.c99d2a0a.2f58.ffff9ac2SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2013-03-11 15:01 ` Robert Nelson
2013-03-11 11:19 ` [PATCH] ARM: at91: change name template in AT91_SOC_START macro ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-03-14 17:05 [PATCH v2 0/4] SAMA5D3 support ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-14 17:05 ` [PATCH 4/4] ARM: at91: introduce SAMA5 support ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
2013-03-14 17:27 ` Marc Zyngier
2013-03-19 11:23 ` ludovic.desroches at atmel.com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130311123533.GA2001@game.jcrosoft.org \
--to=plagnioj@jcrosoft$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox