| Message ID | 1397481367-12652-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Sachin, On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> wrote: > From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) > > Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. > > Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts > index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts > @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ > }; > }; > > + pinctrl@13400000 { > + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { > + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; > + samsung,pin-function = <0>; > + samsung,pin-pud = <3>; > + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; > + }; > + > + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { > + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; > + samsung,pin-function = <1>; > + samsung,pin-pud = <0>; > + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; > + }; It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi Doug, On 15.04.2014 00:30, Doug Anderson wrote: > Sachin, > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> wrote: >> From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > > I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this > isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the > proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but > I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in > cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... > > The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) > >> >> Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. >> >> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) > > This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: > > Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >> index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >> @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ >> }; >> }; >> >> + pinctrl@13400000 { >> + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { >> + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; >> + samsung,pin-function = <0>; >> + samsung,pin-pud = <3>; >> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; >> + }; >> + >> + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { >> + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; >> + samsung,pin-function = <1>; >> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>; >> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; >> + }; > > It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I > think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other > signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the > pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we > had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. Just a wild guess, but probably the input needs a pull-up, while obviously the output doesn't. I don't have much idea about the arbitration thing happening on snow, so I can't say much about this series. (Maybe description of patch 1/4 should be saying a bit more about the meaning of this?) Best regards, Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Tomasz, On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Doug, > > > On 15.04.2014 00:30, Doug Anderson wrote: >> >> Sachin, >> >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> From: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >> >> >> I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this >> isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the >> proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but >> I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in >> cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... >> >> The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) >> >>> >>> Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >> >> >> This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: >> >> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> >> >> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>> index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>> @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ >>> }; >>> }; >>> >>> + pinctrl@13400000 { >>> + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { >>> + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; >>> + samsung,pin-function = <0>; >>> + samsung,pin-pud = <3>; >>> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; >>> + }; >>> + >>> + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { >>> + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; >>> + samsung,pin-function = <1>; >>> + samsung,pin-pud = <0>; >>> + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; >>> + }; >> >> >> It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I >> think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other >> signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the >> pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we >> had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. > > > Just a wild guess, but probably the input needs a pull-up, while obviously > the output doesn't. I don't have much idea about the arbitration thing > happening on snow, so I can't say much about this series. (Maybe description > of patch 1/4 should be saying a bit more about the meaning of this?) Right, of course. I'm not sure quite what I was thinking. I think I was getting confused since these go through level converters and my brain was in open drain mode. ...but looking at this again this looks reasonable. I think the whole discussion of arbitration was from a long time ago. I think it's fairly well documented in the "i2c-arb-gpio-challenge" driver. Basically it looks like Sachin is getting pinctrl stuff matched up properly for the device tree that's upstream. -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 04/15/14 07:53, Doug Anderson wrote: + DT ML > Tomasz, > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Tomasz Figa<tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Doug, >> >> >> On 15.04.2014 00:30, Doug Anderson wrote: >>> >>> Sachin, >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> From: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>> >>> >>> I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this >>> isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the >>> proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but >>> I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in >>> cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... >>> >>> The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) >>> >>>> >>>> Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >>> >>> >>> This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>> >>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>> index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>> @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ >>>> }; >>>> }; >>>> >>>> + pinctrl@13400000 { >>>> + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { >>>> + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; >>>> + samsung,pin-function =<0>; >>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<3>; >>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>> + }; >>>> + >>>> + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { >>>> + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; >>>> + samsung,pin-function =<1>; >>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<0>; >>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>> + }; >>> >>> >>> It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I >>> think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other >>> signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the >>> pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we >>> had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. >> >> >> Just a wild guess, but probably the input needs a pull-up, while obviously >> the output doesn't. I don't have much idea about the arbitration thing >> happening on snow, so I can't say much about this series. (Maybe description >> of patch 1/4 should be saying a bit more about the meaning of this?) > > Right, of course. I'm not sure quite what I was thinking. I think I > was getting confused since these go through level converters and my > brain was in open drain mode. ...but looking at this again this looks > reasonable. > > I think the whole discussion of arbitration was from a long time ago. > I think it's fairly well documented in the "i2c-arb-gpio-challenge" > driver. > > Basically it looks like Sachin is getting pinctrl stuff matched up > properly for the device tree that's upstream. > Sounds OK to me. Tomasz, do you have any concerns still? Thanks, Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 15.05.2014 21:54, Kukjin Kim wrote: > On 04/15/14 07:53, Doug Anderson wrote: > > + DT ML > >> Tomasz, >> > >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Tomasz Figa<tomasz.figa@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> Hi Doug, >>> >>> >>> On 15.04.2014 00:30, Doug Anderson wrote: >>>> >>>> Sachin, >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> From: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>> >>>> >>>> I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this >>>> isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the >>>> proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but >>>> I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in >>>> cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... >>>> >>>> The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> >>>> This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>> >>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>> index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ >>>>> }; >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> + pinctrl@13400000 { >>>>> + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { >>>>> + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; >>>>> + samsung,pin-function =<0>; >>>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<3>; >>>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>>> + }; >>>>> + >>>>> + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { >>>>> + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; >>>>> + samsung,pin-function =<1>; >>>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<0>; >>>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>>> + }; >>>> >>>> >>>> It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I >>>> think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other >>>> signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the >>>> pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we >>>> had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. >>> >>> >>> Just a wild guess, but probably the input needs a pull-up, while >>> obviously >>> the output doesn't. I don't have much idea about the arbitration thing >>> happening on snow, so I can't say much about this series. (Maybe >>> description >>> of patch 1/4 should be saying a bit more about the meaning of this?) >> >> Right, of course. I'm not sure quite what I was thinking. I think I >> was getting confused since these go through level converters and my >> brain was in open drain mode. ...but looking at this again this looks >> reasonable. >> >> I think the whole discussion of arbitration was from a long time ago. >> I think it's fairly well documented in the "i2c-arb-gpio-challenge" >> driver. >> >> Basically it looks like Sachin is getting pinctrl stuff matched up >> properly for the device tree that's upstream. >> > Sounds OK to me. > > Tomasz, do you have any concerns still? Nope. This series looked quite fine for me from the beginning, just wanted to make sure I understand things happening here correctly. Feel free to add Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa <t.figa@samsung.com> to all four patches if not too late yet. Best regards, Tomasz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 05/16/14 05:00, Tomasz Figa wrote: > On 15.05.2014 21:54, Kukjin Kim wrote: >> On 04/15/14 07:53, Doug Anderson wrote: >> >> + DT ML >> >>> Tomasz, >>> >> >>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Tomasz Figa<tomasz.figa@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Doug, >>>> >>>> >>>> On 15.04.2014 00:30, Doug Anderson wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sachin, >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 6:16 AM, Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I probably wouldn't have bothered giving me authorship since this >>>>> isn't exactly a clean patch from the chromium tree (you pulled the >>>>> proper pieces yourself, did the commit message yourself, etc). ...but >>>>> I appreciate the thought and as far as I know setting the "author" in >>>>> cases like this is a bit of a judgement call... >>>>> >>>>> The Signed-off-by is certainly correct. ;) >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Added i2c-arbitrator pinctrl node to Snow board. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat<sachin.kamat@linaro.org> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This matches what's in our tree and and is what people are using, so: >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>>> index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts >>>>>> @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ >>>>>> }; >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>>> + pinctrl@13400000 { >>>>>> + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { >>>>>> + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-function =<0>; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<3>; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>>>> + }; >>>>>> + >>>>>> + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { >>>>>> + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-function =<1>; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-pud =<0>; >>>>>> + samsung,pin-drv =<0>; >>>>>> + }; >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It's odd to me that one of these has a pullup but not the other, but I >>>>> think that's because the arbitration lines ended up using some other >>>>> signals that were originally hooked up for other usage. Certainly the >>>>> pullups / pulldowns match what's in our tree and also match what we >>>>> had in the original shipping 3.4 kernel. >>>> >>>> >>>> Just a wild guess, but probably the input needs a pull-up, while >>>> obviously >>>> the output doesn't. I don't have much idea about the arbitration thing >>>> happening on snow, so I can't say much about this series. (Maybe >>>> description >>>> of patch 1/4 should be saying a bit more about the meaning of this?) >>> >>> Right, of course. I'm not sure quite what I was thinking. I think I >>> was getting confused since these go through level converters and my >>> brain was in open drain mode. ...but looking at this again this looks >>> reasonable. >>> >>> I think the whole discussion of arbitration was from a long time ago. >>> I think it's fairly well documented in the "i2c-arb-gpio-challenge" >>> driver. >>> >>> Basically it looks like Sachin is getting pinctrl stuff matched up >>> properly for the device tree that's upstream. >>> >> Sounds OK to me. >> >> Tomasz, do you have any concerns still? > > Nope. This series looked quite fine for me from the beginning, just > wanted to make sure I understand things happening here correctly. > > Feel free to add > > Reviewed-by: Tomasz Figa<t.figa@samsung.com> > > to all four patches if not too late yet. > Tomasz, Thanks for your review. - Kukjin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts index 1ce1088..32715b3 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts @@ -39,6 +39,22 @@ }; }; + pinctrl@13400000 { + arb_their_claim: arb-their-claim { + samsung,pins = "gpe0-4"; + samsung,pin-function = <0>; + samsung,pin-pud = <3>; + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; + }; + + arb_our_claim: arb-our-claim { + samsung,pins = "gpf0-3"; + samsung,pin-function = <1>; + samsung,pin-pud = <0>; + samsung,pin-drv = <0>; + }; + }; + gpio-keys { compatible = "gpio-keys"; @@ -65,6 +81,9 @@ wait-retry-us = <3000>; wait-free-us = <50000>; + pinctrl-names = "default"; + pinctrl-0 = <&arb_our_claim &arb_their_claim>; + /* Use ID 104 as a hint that we're on physical bus 4 */ i2c_104: i2c@0 { reg = <0>;