[PATCH v1 1/3] ARM: dts: am335x-bone: add support for beaglebone NAND cape

[Nishanth Menon]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Gupta, Pekon <pekon at ti.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>From: Menon, Nishanth
>>>On 03/12/2014 05:49 AM, Pekon Gupta wrote:
>>> Beaglebone Board can be connected to expansion boards to add devices to them.
>>> These expansion boards are called 'capes'. This patch adds support for
>>> following versions of Beaglebone(AM335x) NAND capes
>>> (a) NAND Device with bus-width=16, block-size=128k, page-size=2k, oob-size=64
>>> (b) NAND Device with bus-width=16, block-size=256k, page-size=4k, oob-size=224
>>> Further information and datasheets can be found at [1] and [2]
> [...]
>>> [1] http://beagleboardtoys.info/index.php?title=BeagleBone_Memory_Expansion
>>> [2] http://beagleboardtoys.info/index.php?title=BeagleBone_4Gb_16-Bit_NAND_Module
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pekon Gupta <pekon at ti.com>
>>> ---
>>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone.dts | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 123 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone.dts
>>> index 94ee427..be2c572 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone.dts
>>
>>better to make a nand_cape dts which includes the am335x-bone.dts?
>>
> Actually, I'm not in favor of having too many "xx_board_common.dts" files,
> because it un-necessarily complexes things.
>
> We already have "arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-bone-common.dtsi" which just saves
> some lines common to DTS of both Beaglebone-LT(white) and Beaglebone-Black.
> And, there is no guarantee that Beaglebone-LT(white) will remain compatible to
> Beaglebone-black in future.
> Example: some capes are not compatible to beaglebone-black [1], [2].
>
> So, I prefer to keep separate GPMC NAND nodes separately in both DTS,
> unless there is a strong convincing reason otherwise.
>
>
> [1] http://elinux.org/CircuitCo:BeagleBoardToys
> [2] http://elinux.org/BeagleBone_Black_Capes



Right, and adding NAND, GPMC nodes and asking folks to uncomment
sections into a generic board file (which by default has none) makes
more sense? I dont use NAND capes or might create my own cape. overo
has the same challenges as bone family has.I dont see asking folks to
uncomment entries to use the cape is a nicer alternative to having
more dts entries.

Regards,
Nishanth Menon