| Message ID | 1394637404-7651-5-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mar 13, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > On 03/12/2014 06:16 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > >The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible > >with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for > >it in the devicetree file. > > >Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> > >--- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > >diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 > >--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >@@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ > > clocks = <&mainpll>; > > clock-output-names = "nand"; > > }; > >+ > >+ nand@d0000 { > > ePAPR standard [1] tells us: > > The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of > the device and not its precise programming model. If appropriate, the name > should be one of the following choices: > > [...] > • flash > I think 'nand' is generic enough, isn't it? In any case, it seems sane to distinguish a NAND flash from a NOR flash, from a SPI flash. FWIW, quite a few other SoCs have chosen 'nand' for the node name, including the other Armada variants. Was this a wrong choice?
Hello. On 03/12/2014 06:16 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible > with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for > it in the devicetree file. > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > @@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ > clocks = <&mainpll>; > clock-output-names = "nand"; > }; > + > + nand@d0000 { ePAPR standard [1] tells us: The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of the device and not its precise programming model. If appropriate, the name should be one of the following choices: [...] • flash [1] http://www.power.org/resources/downloads/Power_ePAPR_APPROVED_v1.0.pdf WBR, Sergei
On Mar 13, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > On 03/12/2014 11:30 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: > > >>>The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible > >>>with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for > >>>it in the devicetree file. > > >>>Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> > >>>--- > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > >>>diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >>>index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 > >>>--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >>>+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi > >>>@@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ > >>> clocks = <&mainpll>; > >>> clock-output-names = "nand"; > >>> }; > >>>+ > >>>+ nand@d0000 { > > >> ePAPR standard [1] tells us: > > >>The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of > >>the device and not its precise programming model. If appropriate, the name > >>should be one of the following choices: > > >>[...] > >>• flash > > >I think 'nand' is generic enough, isn't it? > > It is but not more generic than "flash". :-) > Right. > >FWIW, quite a few other SoCs have chosen 'nand' for the node name, including > >the other Armada variants. Was this a wrong choice? > > I guess. There's a lot of wrong choices now all over the > arch/arm/boot/dts/ because people are probably not aware of the necessary > documentation such as http://devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage (pointing to > ePAPR and having a passage on the generic device names too). > OK, I guess it's fine. Let's try to do things from now on, at least. I'll fix this and send a new series.
On 03/12/2014 11:30 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>> The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible >>> with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for >>> it in the devicetree file. >>> Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi >>> index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi >>> @@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ >>> clocks = <&mainpll>; >>> clock-output-names = "nand"; >>> }; >>> + >>> + nand@d0000 { >> ePAPR standard [1] tells us: >> The name of a node should be somewhat generic, reflecting the function of >> the device and not its precise programming model. If appropriate, the name >> should be one of the following choices: >> [...] >> • flash > I think 'nand' is generic enough, isn't it? It is but not more generic than "flash". :-) > In any case, it seems sane to distinguish a NAND flash from a NOR flash, > from a SPI flash. I don't know enough about the SPI flashes but this is only a node name, no more, so I think we can afford to be really generic... > FWIW, quite a few other SoCs have chosen 'nand' for the node name, including > the other Armada variants. Was this a wrong choice? I guess. There's a lot of wrong choices now all over the arch/arm/boot/dts/ because people are probably not aware of the necessary documentation such as http://devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage (pointing to ePAPR and having a passage on the generic device names too). WBR, Sergei
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi index 76cc27e..18d8f80 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi @@ -345,6 +345,16 @@ clocks = <&mainpll>; clock-output-names = "nand"; }; + + nand@d0000 { + compatible = "marvell,armada370-nand"; + reg = <0xd0000 0x54>; + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 84 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; + clocks = <&coredivclk 0>; + status = "disabled"; + }; }; };
The Armada 38x SoC family has a NAND controller, compatible with the controller in Armada 370/375/XP SoCs. Add support for it in the devicetree file. Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-38x.dtsi | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)