[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/5] gpio: Cygnus: define Broadcom Cygnus GPIO binding

On 12/8/2014 3:22 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Sunday 07 December 2014 18:38:32 Ray Jui wrote:
>> +Required properties:
>> +
>> +- compatible:
>> + Currently supported Cygnus GPIO controllers include:
>> + "brcm,cygnus-ccm-gpio": ChipcommonG GPIO controller
>> + "brcm,cygnus-asiu-gpio": ASIU GPIO controller
>> + "brcm,cygnus-crmu-gpio": CRMU GPIO controller
> How different are these? If they are almost the same, would it
> be better to use the same compatible string for all of them and
> describe the differences in extra properties?
> If they are rather different, maybe you should have a separate
> binding and driver for each?
> Arnd
They are quite similar with the following minor differences:
1) ChipcommonG GPIO controller uses a separate register block
(0x0301d164) to control drive stregnth
2) Cannot control drive strength for the CMRU GPIO
3) CRMU GPIO controller's interrupt is not connected to GIC of A9.
Currently that's taken care of by using a "no-interrupt" device tree

I can change to use the common compatible string "brcm,cygnus-gpio".
With an introduction of property "no-drv-stregnth" which should be set
for CRMU GPIO controller. For ChipcommonG GPIO, it will have a second
register block defined, so we'll know to use that second register block
for drive strength configuration. For the rest, we assume normal drive
strength configuration (i.e., ASIU in our case).

Looking at this again, it looks like the "no-interrupt" property is
really redundant. For GPIO controller without interrupt connected to A9,
we can simply leave its interrupt properties not defined. I'll get rid
of it along with the above changes.

 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-08 18:01    [W:0.065 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site