[PATCH v4 1/4] Documentation: dt-bindings: Describe SROMc configuration

[Rob Herring]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<k.kozlowski at samsung.com> wrote:
> On 30.10.2015 15:58, Pavel Fedin wrote:
>>  Hello!
>>
>>>> Add documentation for new subnode properties, allowing bank configuration.
>>>> Based on u-boot implementation, but heavily reworked.
>>>
>>> Please, carefully look at:
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/gpmc-eth.txt
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/bus/ti-gpmc.txt
>>
>>  Thank you very much. Indeed, this looks very similar. By the way, should i document smsc over sromc in the same manner, writing
>> devicetree/bindings/net/sromc-eth.txt?
>>
>>  This is a short reply for now, i'll make longer one (or just a new version) after studying these existing bindings and trying to
>> apply them.
>
> Existing SROMC bindings document is small so one document for everything
> should be sufficient. This can be always split if new type of devices
> will be using SROMC (BTW, do you know of any other devices using SROMC
> on Exynos?).
>
>>
>>  Pankaj:
>>
>>>> +&sromc {
>>>> +       pinctrl-names = "default";
>>>> +       pinctrl-0 = <&srom_ctl>, <&srom_ebi>;
>>>> +
>>>> +       ethernet at 07000000 {
>>>> +               compatible = "smsc,lan9115";
>>>> +               reg = <0x07000000 0x10000>;
>>>> +               phy-mode = "mii";
>>>> +               interrupt-parent = <&gpx0>;
>>>> +               interrupts = <5 8>;
>>>> +               reg-io-width = <2>;
>>>> +               smsc,irq-push-pull;
>>>> +               smsc,force-internal-phy;
>>>> +
>>>> +               samsung,srom-bank = <3>;
>>>> +               samsung,srom-data-width = <2>;
>>>> +               samsung,srom-timing = <1 9 12 1 9 1 1>;
>>>
>>> I think this is not correct. We can't change binding of "smsc,lan9115"
>>> which is already documented here [1]. These samsung specific srom
>>> properties should be in srom node or its subnode, but not in this way.
>>
>>  So, if you look at gpmc-eth.txt, you'll see that this approach is perfectly valid (this is a reply to another msg, just don't want
>> to post one more single-line reply).
>
>
> Yes, the binding of smsc,lan9115 is not changed.
>
> Putting srom properties in separate bank node would be good also but
> then some mapping (connection) between ethernet and bank should be added
> probably...

Is this to get some data needed by the ethernet from the ROM? We have
the nvmem binding to support that.

Rob