[PATCH 02/11] ARM: at91: switch 1arm to DT

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 19:27 Fri 15 Nov     , boris brezillon wrote:
> On 15/11/2013 18:41, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >On 17:10 Fri 15 Nov     , boris brezillon wrote:
> >>On 15/11/2013 15:49, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >>>Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
> >>>Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre at atmel.com>
> >>>---
> >>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile            |  1 +
> >>>  arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-1arm.dts       | 70 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>  arch/arm/configs/at91rm9200_defconfig |  1 -
> >>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/Kconfig.non_dt     |  6 ---
> >>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/Makefile           |  1 -
> >>>  arch/arm/mach-at91/board-1arm.c       | 99 -----------------------------------
> >>>  6 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 107 deletions(-)
> >>>  create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-1arm.dts
> >>>  delete mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-at91/board-1arm.c
> >>>
> >>>diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> >>>index 802720e..f1fb6d7 100644
> >>>--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> >>>+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
> >>>@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ ifeq ($(CONFIG_OF),y)
> >>>  # Keep at91 dtb files sorted alphabetically for each SoC
> >>>  # rm9200
> >>>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) += at91rm9200ek.dtb
> >>>+dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) += at91-1arm.dtb
> >>>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) += mpa1600.dtb
> >>>  # sam9260
> >>>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91) += animeo_ip.dtb
> >>>diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-1arm.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-1arm.dts
> >>>new file mode 100644
> >>>index 0000000..39b0c56
> >>>--- /dev/null
> >>>+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-1arm.dts
> >>>@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
> >>>+/*
> >>>+ * at91-1arm.dts - Device Tree file for Ajeco 1ARM single board computer
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * Copyright (C) 2013 Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
> >>>+ *
> >>>+ * Licensed under GPLv2 only
> >>>+ */
> >>>+/dts-v1/;
> >>>+#include "at91rm9200_pqfp.dtsi"
> >>>+
> >>>+/ {
> >>>+	model = "Ajeco 1ARM single board computer";
> >>>+	compatible = "ajeco,1arm", "atmel,at91rm9200-pqfp", "atmel,at91rm9200";
> >>>+
> >>>+	clocks {
> >>>+		#address-cells = <1>;
> >>>+		#size-cells = <1>;
> >>>+		ranges;
> >>>+
> >>>+		main_clock: clock at 0 {
> >>>+			compatible = "atmel,osc", "fixed-clock";
> >>>+			clock-frequency = <18432000>;
> >>>+		};
> >>>+	};
> >>>+
> >>>+	ahb {
> >>>+		apb {
> >>>+			dbgu: serial at fffff200 {
> >>>+				status = "okay";
> >>>+			};
> >>>+
> >>>+			usart0: serial at fffc0000 {
> >>>+				pinctrl-0 =
> >>>+						<&pinctrl_uart0
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart0_rts
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart0_cts>;
> >>>+
> >>>+				status = "okay";
> >>>+			};
> >>>+
> >>>+			usart1: serial at fffc4000 {
> >>>+				pinctrl-0 =
> >>>+						<&pinctrl_uart1
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart1_rts
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart1_cts
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart1_dtr_dsr
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart1_dcd
> >>>+						 &pinctrl_uart1_ri>;
> >>>+				status = "okay";
> >>>+			};
> >>>+
> >>>+			macb0: ethernet at fffbc000 {
> >>>+				phy-mode = "rmii";
> >>>+				/* phy irq PC4 */
> >>>+				status = "okay";
> >>>+			};
> >>
> >>Could you add a phy node in macb0 node (see
> >>https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/8/28/183) ?
> >>In this node you can describe phy irq and even phy id (if it is hardcoded).
> >>
> >>The same goes for all rm9200 boards except rm9200ek (I already
> >>posted a series for this one).
> >I did not do this as this code was never tested on those board as the driver
> >was not supporting it so as I can not test it I do not want to do it
> 
> How could this be a valid argument ?
> I'm not telling that this should be mainlined without any tests, but
> IMHO dropping
> new features because we don't have time to test it is not a good approach.

execpt here the board code was never tested as when the board was merged the
cadence driver did NOT support phy IRQ so I can garanti it will work

so I do not prodive the DT support if the board maintainer care about its
board it will fix it


> 
> Moreover, the non-dt versions of these boards provide phy irq
> functionality and I think
> we should at least provide the same level of functionality when
> migrating to dt.
> 
> I implemented the phy dt definition support for macb (and implicitely for
> at91_ether) ethernet drivers, and I think this should be used for
> all new dt boards.

If you want to use it and work on the HW

here I'm note sure so I play safe

Best Regards,
J.