On 03/09/2012 03:53 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > On 11:08 Thu 08 Mar , Rob Herring wrote: >> On 03/08/2012 02:50 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >>> For now on use i2c-gpio driver on the same pin as the hardware IP. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <[email protected]> >>> Cc: Nicolas Ferre <[email protected]> >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> --- >>> 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. >> >> Rob >> >>> + 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 >> [email protected] >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
