Re: [PATCH 2/5 v3] ARM: at91: sam9g20 add i2c DT support
From: Rob Herring <hidden>
Date: 2012-03-09 13:59:17
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel
On 03/09/2012 03:53 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
On 11:08 Thu 08 Mar , Rob Herring wrote:quoted
On 03/08/2012 02:50 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:quoted
For now on use i2c-gpio driver on the same pin as the hardware IP. Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj-sclMFOaUSTBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Cc: Nicolas Ferre <redacted> Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org --- v3: update i2c binding (Rob comments) Best Regards, J. arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g20.dtsi | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g20.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g20.dtsi index 4b0dc99..072b2da 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g20.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g20.dtsi@@ -189,4 +189,17 @@ status = "disabled"; }; }; +> > + i2c-gpio@0 {You updated the example, but not all the actual uses to i2c@0.on purpose as on some soc we will have HW and soft binding on the board you put the alias
I'm not sure I follow. If you use the h/w block, then you would have i2c@<addr> while for gpio it's basically an index. Also, I don't think you need an alias for i2c. You should not care about bus numbering as devices should be sub nodes. Rob
Best Regards, J.quoted
Robquoted
+ compatible = "i2c-gpio"; + gpios = <&pioA 23 0 /* sda */ + &pioA 24 0 /* scl */ + >; + i2c-gpio,sda-open-drain; + i2c-gpio,scl-open-drain; + i2c-gpio,delay-us = <2>; /* ~100 kHz */ + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <0>; + status = "disabled"; + }; };_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel