On 07/02/13 09:51, Mark Jackson wrote:
> Okay ... I have made some progress, but it's not ideal.
<snip>
> But the physmap driver (of_flash_probe()) is unable to use this information.
> It seems that although
> I can call of_flash_probe() from my NOR setup code, the platform_device being
> reference is wrong.
>
> The platform_device passed to my gpmc_probe_nor_child() routine from
> gpmc_probe_dt() points to my
> gpmc entry (above), but the physmap probe requires its own DT entry (rather
> than a node child such
> as my NOR entry with the GPMC device entry).
>
> So I need to have any extra entry in the DT file as follows:-
>
> nor-flash@08000000 {
> compatible = "spansion,s29gl064n90t", "cfi-flash";
> reg = <0x08000000 0x00800000>;
> bank-width = <2>;
> };
>
> So the GPMC entry handles all the chip select and timing setup, but the 2nd
> entry is the only one
> the physmap driver can see.
>
> Would it be acceptable to re-code of_flash_probe() to allow either a child
> device_node to be passed
> or a platform_device ?
Or is it acceptable to simply state the gpmc portion is for setting up the chip
access, and you *do*
need a separate physmap section ?
That's certainly easier, and it works without any changes to the physmap driver.
Regards
Mark J.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
