On 19 November 2012 21:58, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Support for byte- and word- properties is relatively recent I believe
> (or at least, the /bits/ syntax is). Which dtc version are you using?
Ok, i was on a older version. I just saw this patch now:
commit
On 11/18/2012 11:41 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 19 November 2012 12:05, Rajanikanth HV wrote:
>> On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
>>> Can you point me to the specification?
>>
On 11/18/2012 11:41 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 19 November 2012 12:05, Rajanikanth HV rajanikanth...@linaro.org wrote:
On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
Can you point me to the
On 19 November 2012 21:58, Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
Support for byte- and word- properties is relatively recent I believe
(or at least, the /bits/ syntax is). Which dtc version are you using?
Ok, i was on a older version. I just saw this patch now:
commit
On 19 November 2012 12:05, Rajanikanth HV wrote:
> On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
>> Can you point me to the specification?
> http://www.devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage
> "
> a-byte-data-property = [0x01
On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
> Can you point me to the specification?
http://www.devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage
"
a-byte-data-property = [0x01 0x23 0x34 0x56];
"
>
> And simply passing 0x50, 0x60 etc..
On 19 November 2012 11:54, Rajanikanth HV wrote:
>> data1 = /bits/ 8 <0x50 0x60 0x70>;
> as per spec, format for data byte defines will be:
> data1 = [ 0x50 0x60 0x70 ];
> however, i see a parse error from device tree compiler when i tried.
Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if
On 19 November 2012 09:24, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 12 November 2012 09:03, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> I don't think the size is stored in the dtb. It is only in the dts. You
>>> need to define the size in the binding definitions and use '/bits/'
On 12 November 2012 09:03, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring wrote:
>> I don't think the size is stored in the dtb. It is only in the dts. You
>> need to define the size in the binding definitions and use '/bits/'
>> annotation. With this the data is packed. Then the
On 12 November 2012 09:03, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think the size is stored in the dtb. It is only in the dts. You
need to define the size in the binding definitions and use '/bits/'
annotation.
On 19 November 2012 09:24, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 12 November 2012 09:03, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think the size is stored in the dtb. It is only in the dts. You
need to
On 19 November 2012 11:54, Rajanikanth HV rajanikanth...@linaro.org wrote:
data1 = /bits/ 8 0x50 0x60 0x70;
as per spec, format for data byte defines will be:
data1 = [ 0x50 0x60 0x70 ];
however, i see a parse error from device tree compiler when i tried.
Firstly you tried square braces [ ],
On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
Can you point me to the specification?
http://www.devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage
a-byte-data-property = [0x01 0x23 0x34 0x56];
And simply passing
On 19 November 2012 12:05, Rajanikanth HV rajanikanth...@linaro.org wrote:
On 19 November 2012 12:00, Viresh Kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
Firstly you tried square braces [ ], I am not sure if that is allowed.
Can you point me to the specification?
On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 11/11/2012 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
>>
cluster0: cluster@0 {
+ data1 = <0x50 0x60 0x70>;
+
On 11/11/2012 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
>
>>> cluster0: cluster@0 {
>>> + data1 = <0x50 0x60 0x70>;
>>> + data2 = <0x5000 0x6000 0x7000>;
On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
>> cluster0: cluster@0 {
>> + data1 = <0x50 0x60 0x70>;
>> + data2 = <0x5000 0x6000 0x7000>;
>> + data3 = <0x5000
On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> +#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
>>> \
>
>>> + while (_sz--) \
>>> + *_out++ =
On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
\
+ while (_sz--) \
+ *_out++
On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
cluster0: cluster@0 {
+ data1 = 0x50 0x60 0x70;
+ data2 = 0x5000 0x6000 0x7000;
+ data3 =
On 11/11/2012 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
cluster0: cluster@0 {
+ data1 = 0x50 0x60 0x70;
+ data2 = 0x5000 0x6000
On 12 November 2012 01:12, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/11/2012 11:27 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 11 November 2012 19:42, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/06/2012 10:22 PM, viresh kumar wrote:
cluster0: cluster@0 {
+ data1
Ping!!
On 7 November 2012 09:52, viresh kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> +#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
>>> \
>
>>> + while (_sz--) \
>>> +
Ping!!
On 7 November 2012 09:52, viresh kumar viresh.ku...@linaro.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
\
+ while (_sz--)
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> +#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
>> \
>> + while (_sz--) \
>> + *_out++ = (typeof(*_out))be32_to_cpup(_val++); \
> This
On 10/25/2012 11:20 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> This adds following helper routines:
> - of_property_read_u8_array()
> - of_property_read_u16_array()
> - of_property_read_u8()
> - of_property_read_u16()
>
> First two actually share most of the code with of_property_read_u32_array(),
> so
> the
On 10/25/2012 11:20 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
This adds following helper routines:
- of_property_read_u8_array()
- of_property_read_u16_array()
- of_property_read_u8()
- of_property_read_u16()
First two actually share most of the code with of_property_read_u32_array(),
so
the common part
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Rob Herring robherri...@gmail.com wrote:
+#define of_property_read_array(_np, _pname, _out, _sz)
\
+ while (_sz--) \
+ *_out++ = (typeof(*_out))be32_to_cpup(_val++);
28 matches
Mail list logo
