arm: dts: lpc32xx: update ssp / spi nodes

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

The change adds clock properties to spi peripheral devices, clock ids are taken from dt-bindings/clock/lpc32xx-clock.h

Signed-off-by Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi +0 -0

index c58d8da..0b6a643 100644

Hi Sylvain,

Quoted 15 lines · slemieux.tyco at gmail.com

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

The change adds clock properties to spi peripheral devices, clock ids are taken from dt-bindings/clock/lpc32xx-clock.h

Signed-off-by Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi +0 -0

index c58d8da..0b6a643 100644

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi line 177

Quoted 5 lines

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi +2 -0

@@ -173,6 +173,8 @@
 			spi1: spi at 20088000 {
 				compatible = "nxp,lpc3220-spi";
 				reg = <0x20088000 0x1000>;
+				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SPI1>;
+				clock-names = "apb_pclk";

I'm not sure that here is a correct clock name, and it looks like it is copied from some PrimeCell device node, may be "arm,pl022" SPI.

Reasons to NOT add clock-names property:
* the name is one in one PrimeCell clock name, which may be confusing,
* there is no "nxp,lpc3220-spi" SPI controller driver in the mainline,
* there is no documented description of controller's properties,
* the controller has only one clock, so I believe "clock-names" is redundant here.

I don't object against adding "clocks" property, but no public driver means no testing, unfortunately.

FWIW there was an attempt to add the driver of pretty bad quality,

and it does not define a "clock-names" property [1].

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi line 192

Quoted 9 lines

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi +2 -0

 			};
 
 			ssp1: ssp at 2008c000 {

@@ -186,6 +188,8 @@
 			spi2: spi at 20090000 {
 				compatible = "nxp,lpc3220-spi";
 				reg = <0x20090000 0x1000>;
+				clocks = <&clk LPC32XX_CLK_SPI2>;
+				clock-names = "apb_pclk";

Same as above.

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi line 195

Quoted 4 lines

arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi +0 -0

 			};
 
 			i2s0: i2s at 20094000 {

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/12/61

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts +0 -0

index a00d7ce..26e070f 100644

Hi Sylvain,

Quoted 2 lines · slemieux.tyco at gmail.com

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

even a short commit message is highly appreciated, e.g. "this is a preparatory change prior to disabling SSPx controllers by default in the shared LPC32xx DTSI file".

Quoted 15 lines

Signed-off-by Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts +1 -0

index a00d7ce..26e070f 100644
@@ -146,6 +146,7 @@
 				#size-cells = <0>;
 				num-cs = <1>;
 				cs-gpios = <&gpio 3 5 0>;
+				status = "okay";
 

arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts line 152

Quoted 3 lines

arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts +0 -0

 				eeprom: at25 at 0 {
 					pl022,interface = <0>;

Could you please swap 2/3 and 3/3 ?

This may save some time to git-bisect users, if there are any :)

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

This patchset change the following:
1) adds clock properties to spi peripheral devices, clock ids are taken from dt-bindings/clock/lpc32xx-clock.h

2) disable, by default, the SSP0/SPI1 and SSP1/SPI2 shared pinout; shared pin should be enable in board specific dts, as needed.

3) enable SSP0 used by PHY3250.

Sylvain Lemieux (3):
arm: dts: lpc32xx: add clock properties to spi nodes
arm: dts: lpc32xx: disabled ssp0/spi1 & ssp1/spi2 by default
arm: dts: phy3250: enable ssp0

 arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi | 16 ++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts  |  1 +
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)

Quoted 11 lines · On Thursday 14 April 2016 08:20:34 slemieux.tyco at gmail.com wrote:

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

This patchset change the following:
1) adds clock properties to spi peripheral devices, clock ids are taken from dt-bindings/clock/lpc32xx-clock.h

2) disable, by default, the SSP0/SPI1 and SSP1/SPI2 shared pinout; shared pin should be enable in board specific dts, as needed.

3) enable SSP0 used by PHY3250.

Quoted 10 lines

Sylvain Lemieux (3):
arm: dts: lpc32xx: add clock properties to spi nodes
arm: dts: lpc32xx: disabled ssp0/spi1 & ssp1/spi2 by default
arm: dts: phy3250: enable ssp0

 arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi | 16 ++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts  |  1 +
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)

The patches look fine, but it's unclear what you want to happen with them as long as the maintainer situation is not resolved. I've seen patches from Vladimir and you recently, and none from Roland, so I think it would be good if one or both of you could officially step up to be maintainers and collect all patches to forward them to arm at kernel.org for inclusion.

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

For the patch descriptions, please always start the subject with 'ARM', not 'arm' to follow the common convention, and always add a multi-line description even for trivial patches.

Arnd

Hi Arnd,

Quoted 23 lines · Arnd Bergmann

Quoted 11 lines · On Thursday 14 April 2016 08:20:34 slemieux.tyco at gmail.com wrote:

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

This patchset change the following:
1) adds clock properties to spi peripheral devices, clock ids are taken from dt-bindings/clock/lpc32xx-clock.h

2) disable, by default, the SSP0/SPI1 and SSP1/SPI2 shared pinout; shared pin should be enable in board specific dts, as needed.

3) enable SSP0 used by PHY3250.

Quoted 10 lines

Sylvain Lemieux (3):
arm: dts: lpc32xx: add clock properties to spi nodes
arm: dts: lpc32xx: disabled ssp0/spi1 & ssp1/spi2 by default
arm: dts: phy3250: enable ssp0

 arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi | 16 ++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/phy3250.dts  |  1 +
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+)

Quoted 5 lines

The patches look fine, but it's unclear what you want to happen with them as long as the maintainer situation is not resolved. I've seen patches from Vladimir and you recently, and none from Roland, so I think it would be good if one or both of you could officially step up to be maintainers and collect all patches to forward them to arm at kernel.org for inclusion.

for v4.5 and v4.6 I collected my own patches from LAKML after review, I started to do it for v4.7, but probably a bit later than desired.

Could you please remind me, when do ARM maintainers generally stop applying "for-next" pull requests?

Hi Arnd,

Quoted 3 lines · Arnd Bergmann

Quoted 2 lines · On Thursday 14 April 2016 08:20:34 slemieux.tyco at gmail.com wrote:

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

The patches look fine, but it's unclear what you want to happen with them as long as the maintainer situation is not resolved. I've seen patches from Vladimir and you recently, and none from Roland, so I think it would be good if one or both of you could officially step up to be maintainers and collect all patches to forward them to arm at kernel.org for inclusion.

for v4.5 and v4.6 I collected my own patches from LAKML after review, I started to do it for v4.7, but probably a bit later than desired.

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

I'll send a change on behalf of myself, at this point I don't think that pure lpc32xx maintenance (deliberately here I exclude development!) task takes more than 20 hours per month, which is affordable for me, Sylvain please express your view.

Quoted 3 lines

Arnd

--
With best wishes,
Vladimir

Quoted 3 lines · Vladimir Zapolskiy

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

Quoted 5 lines

I'll send a change on behalf of myself, at this point I don't think that pure lpc32xx maintenance (deliberately here I exclude development!) task takes more than 20 hours per month, which is affordable for me, Sylvain please express your view.

I can provide support for pure lpc32xx maintenance task (I also exclude development); I can free up to 10-15 hours a month for doing testing and patch review.

Is there any documentation available on the process to submit a merge request to the mailing list?

Quoted 4 lines · On Monday 18 April 2016 17:22:28 Sylvain Lemieux wrote:

Quoted 3 lines · Vladimir Zapolskiy

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

I'll send a change on behalf of myself, at this point I don't think that pure lpc32xx maintenance (deliberately here I exclude development!) task takes more than 20 hours per month, which is affordable for me, Sylvain please express your view.

I can provide support for pure lpc32xx maintenance task (I also exclude development); I can free up to 10-15 hours a month for doing testing and patch review.

Thanks both of you!

Quoted 2 lines

Is there any documentation available on the process to submit a merge request to the mailing list?

We usually teach people on the fly, but you can watch my ELC presentation from last year at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msT1O8P6KXQ

Arnd

Hi Vladimir,

Quoted 5 lines · Arnd Bergmann

Quoted 4 lines · On Monday 18 April 2016 17:22:28 Sylvain Lemieux wrote:

Quoted 3 lines · Vladimir Zapolskiy

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

Will you send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file or do you want me to send it?

Should we add the lpc32xx dts to the list of supported file?

Quoted 14 lines

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines

I'll send a change on behalf of myself, at this point I don't think that pure lpc32xx maintenance (deliberately here I exclude development!) task takes more than 20 hours per month, which is affordable for me, Sylvain please express your view.

I can provide support for pure lpc32xx maintenance task (I also exclude development); I can free up to 10-15 hours a month for doing testing and patch review.

Thanks both of you!

Quoted 2 lines

Is there any documentation available on the process to submit a merge request to the mailing list?

Quoted 4 lines

We usually teach people on the fly, but you can watch my ELC presentation from last year at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msT1O8P6KXQ

Arnd

Sylvain

Hi Sylvain,

Quoted 10 lines · Sylvain Lemieux

Hi Vladimir,

Quoted 5 lines · Arnd Bergmann

Quoted 4 lines · On Monday 18 April 2016 17:22:28 Sylvain Lemieux wrote:

Quoted 3 lines · Vladimir Zapolskiy

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

Will you send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file or do you want me to send it?

I'll send to change, you'll be included as a maintainer, the record also needs some other updates, e.g. it is not about machine support but about SoC support etc.

Arnd, I'm not sure if MAINTAINERS update should go though a pull request (= no explicit SoB from an ARM maintainer) or if you expect to get a patch and apply it yourself, please advise.

Quoted 2 lines

Should we add the lpc32xx dts to the list of supported file?

There is a possibility to add files by regex, which makes sense to do after renaming dts files - this is in my first priority todo list.

Hi Vladimir and Arnd,

Quoted 6 lines · Vladimir Zapolskiy

Hi Arnd,

Quoted 3 lines · Arnd Bergmann

Quoted 2 lines · On Thursday 14 April 2016 08:20:34 slemieux.tyco at gmail.com wrote:

From: Sylvain Lemieux <[email protected]>

...

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 6 lines

Quoted 1 line

The patches look fine, but it's unclear what you want to happen with them as long as the maintainer situation is not resolved. I've seen patches from Vladimir and you recently, and none from Roland, so I think it would be good if one or both of you could officially step up to be maintainers and collect all patches to forward them to arm at kernel.org for inclusion.

Quoted 3 lines

for v4.5 and v4.6 I collected my own patches from LAKML after review, I started to do it for v4.7, but probably a bit later than desired.

Vladimir, would it be possible for you to add my change, after review is done on LAKML, for the lpc32xx pull request you will do for 4.7?

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 2 lines

Once we have an agreement on who does this, please send a patch to update the MAINTAINERS file.

I'll send a change on behalf of myself, at this point I don't think that pure lpc32xx maintenance (deliberately here I exclude development!) task takes more than 20 hours per month, which is affordable for me, Sylvain please express your view.

I can provide support for pure lpc32xx maintenance task (I also exclude development); I can free up to 10-15 hours a month for doing testing and patch review.

Is there any documentation available on the process to submit a merge request to the mailing list?

...