[PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: i.MX53: enable spi support
From: Uwe Kleine-König <hidden>
Date: 2011-01-12 10:16:51
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:03:27PM +0800, Yong Shen wrote:
hi Uwe,quoted
quoted
-#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-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |