2016-08-09 15:34 GMT+02:00 Jon Hunter [off-list ref]:

On 09/08/16 09:40, Mirza Krak wrote:

quoted

2016-08-08 16:44 GMT+02:00 Jon Hunter [off-list ref]:

quoted

On 06/08/16 20:40, Mirza Krak wrote:

quoted

From: Mirza Krak <redacted>

<--snip-->

quoted

quoted

quoted

+ - nvidia,snor-we-width: Number of cycles during which WE stays asserted.
+   Valid values are 0-15, default is 1
+ - nvidia,snor-oe-width: Number of cycles during which OE stays asserted.
+   Valid values are 0-255, default is 1
+ - nvidia,snor-wait-width: Number of cycles before READY is asserted.
+   Valid values are 0-255, default is 3
+
+Example with two SJA1000 CAN controllers connected to the GMI bus:
+
+  gmi at 70090000 {
+    #address-cells = <1>;
+    #size-cells = <1>;

I think 0 for size makes sense. I know that caused you problems before,
but I am wondering if ...

quoted

+    ranges;

... ranges is needed here? If we do have it, I am wondering if it should
be a single entry for the chip-select that is being used. For now we
could only support a ranges with one entry.

        #address-cells = <1>;
        #size-cells = <1>;
        ranges = <4 0x48000000 0x00040000>;

I prefer if we have "ranges" with one single entry, and warn if user enters
multiple for now, like we discussed earlier. Should have really done it in
this series.

I think I do as well.

quoted

quoted

quoted

+    nvidia,snor-mux-mode;
+    nvidia,snor-adv-inv;
+    nvidia,snor-cs-select = <4>;

I would have expected these under bus at X node as they are specific to the
GMI CS.

Yes, that is true.

quoted

I would also expect that the actual chip-select number is encoded in the
reg property.

quoted

+
+    bus at 0,0 {

bus at 4

ACK.

quoted

No mention of this bus node in the above documentation.

I was hesitant documenting it since I am not sure if we really need it
in a generic case? It does make sense in my
specific case. But what would it look like if we could maintain CS in software.

Do you then have a bus node per CS? I am guessing not. Is it enough to
document it in my "example brief"?

I see what you mean. May be it is fine to document with the examples
below how child devices should be populated. You should also state that
currently the GMI only supports one child device currently for the
chip-select that is being used.

Should I really need to state that? Is it not always the case, that
you have one child device per chip-select?

Best Regards
Mirza