[PATCH] gpio: exynos4: Add device tree support
Rob Herring
robherring2 at gmail.com
Tue Oct 11 11:30:17 EDT 2011
On 10/11/2011 10:19 AM, Thomas Abraham wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 11 October 2011 20:41, Rob Herring <robherring2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thomas,
>>
>> On 10/11/2011 03:16 AM, Thomas Abraham wrote:
>>> As gpio chips get registered, a device tree node which represents the
>>> gpio chip is searched and attached to it. A translate function is also
>>> provided to convert the gpio specifier into actual platform settings
>>> for pin function selection, pull up/down and driver strength settings.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham at linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> This patch is based on the latest consolidated Samsung GPIO driver available
>>> in the following tree:
>>> https://github.com/kgene/linux-samsung.git branch: for-next
>>>
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-samsung.txt | 30 +++++++++++
>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-samsung.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-samsung.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-samsung.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-samsung.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..883faeb
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio/gpio-samsung.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
>>> +Samsung Exynos4 GPIO Controller
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible: Format of compatible property value should be
>>> + "samsung,exynos4-gpio-<controller_name>". Example: For GPA0 controller, the
>>> + compatible property value should be "samsung,exynos4-gpio-gpa0".
>>
>> Isn't gpa0 an instance of the h/w, not a version?
>
> GPA0 is a instance of the gpio controller. There are several such
> instances and there could be differences in those instances such as
> the number of GPIO lines managed by that gpio controller instance.
>
That doesn't seem like a reason to have different compatible strings.
Does that affect the programming model of the controller? Unused lines
whether at the board level or SOC level shouldn't really matter.
Rob
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list