--------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael Williamson" <redacted>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 8:56 PM
To: "Subhasish Ghosh" <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>; 
[off-list ref]; "Russell King" [off-list ref]; 
"Kevin Hilman" [off-list ref]; "open list" 
[off-list ref]; [off-list ref]; 
[off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] da850: pruss SUART board specific additions.

Hi Subhasish,

On 2/11/2011 9:51 AM, Subhasish Ghosh wrote:

quoted

This patch adds the pruss SUART pin mux and registers the device
with the pruss mfd driver.

Signed-off-by: Subhasish Ghosh <redacted>
---
 arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c |   36 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c 

b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c
index f9c38f8..3858516 100644

--- a/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-davinci/board-da850-evm.c

@@ -1060,6 +1060,25 @@ const short da850_evm_pruss_can_pins[] = {
 -1
 };

+const short da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins[] = {
+ DA850_AHCLKX, DA850_ACLKX, DA850_AFSX,
+ DA850_AHCLKR, DA850_ACLKR, DA850_AFSR,
+ DA850_AXR_13, DA850_AXR_9, DA850_AXR_7,
+ DA850_AXR_14, DA850_AXR_10, DA850_AXR_8,
+ -1
+};
+

Shouldn't this pins select PRU[0,1]_XXX type functions and not McASP 
functions?
E.G.: PRU0_R31[17] instead of AHCLKX, PRU0_R31[18] instead of AHCLKR, etc.

SG - The Soft-UART implementation uses the McASP as shift registers to push 
out the data sequentially.
            Hence, we configure the McASP PINS and not the PRU PINS.

quoted

+static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = davinci_cfg_reg_list(da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins);
+ if (ret)
+ pr_warning("%s: da850_evm_pruss_suart_pins "
+ "mux setup failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
+ return ret;
+}
+
 static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_can(void)
 {
 int ret, val = 0;

@@ -1085,6 +1104,17 @@ static int __init da850_evm_setup_pruss_can(void)
 return ret;
 }

+static struct da850_evm_pruss_suart_data suart_data = {
+ .version = 1,
+ .resource = {
+ .name = "da8xx_mcasp0_iomem",
+ .start = DAVINCI_DA8XX_MCASP0_REG_BASE,
+ .end = DAVINCI_DA8XX_MCASP0_REG_BASE +
+ (SZ_1K * 12) - 1,
+ .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM,
+ },
+};
+
 static struct da8xx_pruss_can_data can_data = {
 .version = 1,
 };

@@ -1094,6 +1124,12 @@ static struct da8xx_pruss_devices pruss_devices[] 

= {
 .dev_name = "da8xx_pruss_can",
 .pdata = &can_data,
 .pdata_size = sizeof(can_data),
+ .setup = da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart,

Should this be da850_evm_setup_pruss_can instead?

SG - This just the way the patch is displayed. In the code the order is 
correct.

quoted

+ },
+ {
+ .dev_name = "da8xx_pruss_uart",
+ .pdata = &suart_data,
+ .pdata_size = sizeof(suart_data),
 .setup = da850_evm_setup_pruss_can,

Should this be da850_evm_setup_pruss_suart instead?

SG - Ditto

quoted

 },
 {

-Mike