On 07/03/2013 09:04:40 PM, Zhang Haijun-B42677 wrote:
Regards & Thanks
Haijun.
________________________________________
发件人: Wood Scott-B07421
发送时间: 2013年7月3日 19:09
收件人: Zhang Haijun-B42677
Cc: ga...@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Zhang
Haijun-B42677; Huang Changming-R66093
主题: Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/85xx: add the P1020RDB-PD DTS support
On 06/30/2013 11:12:23 PM, Haijun Zhang wrote:
> From: "Haijun.Zhang" <haijun.zh...@freescale.com>
>
> Overview of P1020RDB-PD device:
> - DDR3 2GB
> - NOR flash 64MB
> - NAND flash 128MB
> - SPI flash 16MB
> - I2C EEPROM 256Kb
> - eTSEC1 (RGMII PHY) connected to VSC7385 L2 switch
> - eTSEC2 (SGMII PHY)
> - eTSEC3 (RGMII PHY)
> - SDHC
> - 2 USB ports
> - 4 TDM ports
> - PCIe
>
> Signed-off-by: Haijun Zhang <haijun.zh...@freescale.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jerry Huang <chang-ming.hu...@freescale.com>
> CC: Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1020rdb-pd.dtsi | 257
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1020rdb-pd_32b.dts | 90 +++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 347 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1020rdb-pd.dtsi
> create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/boot/dts/p1020rdb-pd_32b.dts
What about 36b?
Haijun: 2G DDR was fix on P1020RDB-PD board. No need 36bit support.
Also no 36bit uboot support.
So then why not just have one "p1020rdb-pd.dts"?
Or, can you have a common p1020rdb.dtsi that all the variants use, with
the .dts file only handling the differences?
> + cpld@2,0 {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> + compatible = "cpld";
> + reg = <0x2 0x0 0x20000>;
> + read-only;
> + };
Where does "cpld" as a compatible come from (it's way too vague)?
What
is read-only supposed to mean here?
Haijun: In fact almost all board has its special CPLD. This node just
copy from p1020rdb-pc board.
So, change it to :
cpld@2,0 {
compatible = "fsl, p1020rdb-cpld";
reg = <0x2 0x0 0x20000>;
read-only;
};
Again, what is read-only supposed to mean here? I don't care that it's
copied from the PC version. It doesn't make sense, and is not
documented in a binding.
Is the -pd CPLD 100% identical to the -pc CPLD? If not, shouldn't the
compatible note the difference between the two?
-Scott
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
