[PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: i.MX53: enable spi support

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:03:27PM +0800, Yong Shen wrote:
> hi Uwe,
> 
> >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D16__GPIO_3_16          IOMUX_PAD(0x460, 0x118,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D17__GPIO_3_17          IOMUX_PAD(0x464, 0x11C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >> -#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D18__GPIO_3_18          IOMUX_PAD(0x468, 0x120,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D16__CSPI1_SCLK         IOMUX_PAD(0x460, 0x118,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x79c, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D17__CSPI1_MISO         IOMUX_PAD(0x464, 0x11C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x7a0, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >> +#define MX53_PAD_EIM_D18__CSPI1_MOSI         IOMUX_PAD(0x468, 0x120,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT4, 0x7a4, 3, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >>  #define MX53_PAD_EIM_D20__GPIO_3_20          IOMUX_PAD(0x470, 0x128,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> >>  #define MX53_PAD_EIM_D21__GPIO_3_21          IOMUX_PAD(0x474, 0x12C,IOMUX_CONFIG_ALT1, 0x0, 0, NO_PAD_CTRL)
> > Why do you remove the GPIO definitions?
> >
> Why not? Anyway they are always used as cspi signals.
always as in "on the machines currently supported by mainline"?  This
can change.

>                                                       IMO, we don't
> need keep that many configures, and it's better to add them when
> needed.
This proved to not work nicely.  Better generate the complete header
using your excel sheet.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |