On Wed, 2018-02-07 at 17:01 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
> On 01/23/2018 09:51 AM, Sean Wang wrote:
> > On Sat, 2017-12-23 at 23:35 +0800, Sean Wang wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2017-12-23 at 08:52 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 12/22/2017 07:06 AM, sean.w...@mediatek.com wrote:
> >>>> From: Sean Wang <sean.w...@mediatek.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> On bpi-r2 board, totally there're four uarts which we usually called
> >>>> uart[0-3] helpful to extend slow I/O devices. Among those ones, uart2 has
> >>>> dedicated pin slot which is used to conolse log. uart[0-1] appear at the
> >>>> 40-pins connector and uart3 has no pinout, but just has test points (TP47
> >>>> for TX and TP48 for RX, respectively) nearby uart2. Also, some missing
> >>>> pinctrl is being complemented for those devices.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Sean Wang <sean.w...@mediatek.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts | 26
> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >>>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> >>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> >>>> index 7bf5aa2..64bf5db 100644
> >>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> >>>> @@ -409,6 +409,20 @@
> >>>> <MT7623_PIN_82_UTXD1_FUNC_UTXD1>;
> >>>> };do you like it or quite want me to remove the uart3
> >>>> node?
> >>>> };
> >>>> +
> >>>> + uart2_pins_a: uart@2 {
> >>>> + pins_dat {
> >>>> + pinmux = <MT7623_PIN_14_GPIO14_FUNC_URXD2>,
> >>>> + <MT7623_PIN_15_GPIO15_FUNC_UTXD2>;
> >>>> + };
> >>>> + };
> >>>> +
> >>>> + uart3_pins_a: uart@3 {
> >>>> + pins_dat {
> >>>> + pinmux = <MT7623_PIN_242_URTS2_FUNC_URTS2>,
> >>>> + <MT7623_PIN_243_UCTS2_FUNC_UTXD3>;
> >>>> + };
> >>>> + };
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> &pwm {
> >>>> @@ -454,16 +468,24 @@
> >>>> &uart0 {
> >>>> pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>>> pinctrl-0 = <&uart0_pins_a>;
> >>>> - status = "disabled";
> >>>> + status = "okay";
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> &uart1 {
> >>>> pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>>> pinctrl-0 = <&uart1_pins_a>;
> >>>> - status = "disabled";
> >>>> + status = "okay";
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> &uart2 {
> >>>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&uart2_pins_a>;
> >>>> + status = "okay";
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +&uart3 {
> >>>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> >>>> + pinctrl-0 = <&uart3_pins_a>;
> >>>> status = "okay";
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why do we want to enable uart3 when there are only test points?
> >>> It is not very useful, or do I oversee something?
> >>>
> >
> >> I have been listening to the sound from potential users of bpi-r2 to
> >> understand what assistance I have to provide to them. Something could
> >> be seen through [1] in the forum to know they had been trying hard to
> >> explore all available UARTs from the SoC in the last weeks. The patch
> >> should be really useful for these people and for the extra soldering
> >> it shouldn't become a problem for these makers.
> >>
> >> [1] http://forum.banana-pi.org/t/gpio-uart-not-the-debug-port/3748
> >>
> >> Sean
> >>
> >
> > Hi, Matthias
> >
> > do you like it or quite want me to remove the uart3 node?
> >
> > I can take it into account along with other pending dts changes in my
> > queue.
> >
>
> Sorry for the late answer.
> Do I understand correctly that uart3 is routed to TP47 and TP48, and these
> test
> points are accessible through the SATA connector? Doesn't they break SATA
> then?
>
TP47 and TP48 are directly pins out from SoC, not through the SATA
connector.
> I think as they are only available through a non-documented test point, we
> shouldn't enable it.
>
Okay, let's drop uart 3 setting here.
> Regards,
> Matthias
