Am 2022-01-05 11:37, schrieb eugen.hris...@microchip.com:
On 1/5/22 12:04 PM, Michael Walle wrote:
Hi,
Add compatible and data platform struct for sama7g5 SoC.
Signed-off-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hris...@microchip.com>
---
drivers/i2c/at91_i2c.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/at91_i2c.c b/drivers/i2c/at91_i2c.c
index 6b4c0e4804..400a3786ca 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/at91_i2c.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/at91_i2c.c
@@ -305,6 +305,11 @@ static const struct at91_i2c_pdata
sama5d2_config = {
.clk_offset = 3,
};
+static const struct at91_i2c_pdata sama7g5_config = {
+ .clk_max_div = 7,
+ .clk_offset = 3,
+};
+
static const struct udevice_id at91_i2c_ids[] = {
{ .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200-i2c", .data =
(long)&at91rm9200_config },
{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260-i2c", .data =
(long)&at91sam9260_config },
@@ -314,6 +319,7 @@ static const struct udevice_id at91_i2c_ids[] = {
{ .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9x5-i2c", .data =
(long)&at91sam9x5_config },
{ .compatible = "atmel,sama5d4-i2c", .data = (long)&sama5d4_config
},
{ .compatible = "atmel,sama5d2-i2c", .data = (long)&sama5d2_config
},
+{ .compatible = "microchip,sama7g5-i2c", .data =
(long)&sama7g5_config },
I see that this compatible string is is also used in the linux
device tree, but there is no dt binding for it in linux. Could you
add it, so the binding is approved by Rob?
I can, for sure, but the current binding format is txt. I am not sure
if
we have to convert to yaml first, in which case it would be a little
more difficult than just adding a new compatible string.
The current DT node in Linux is also compatible with sam9x60, and this
string is already in the Linux binding file.
I could add the sam9x60 compatible instead, and it will still work, as
9x60 type of i2c is the same as in sama7g5.
You think this option would be better for now ?
It's at least better than adding an undocumented string. But TBH,
this looks like "what can I do to avoid converting the dt binding
to yaml". Which eventually has to be done anyway, so now might be
a good opportunity for that :)
But looking at sama7g5_config above again, will that also be the
correct values for the generic sam9x60?
-michael
