linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: bcm2835: add device tree for Raspberry Pi model B+

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5450AE6F.8010102@linux.com>
Date:	Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:07:59 +0100
From:	Matthias Klein <matthias.klein@...ux.com>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: bcm2835: add device tree for Raspberry Pi model
 B+


Am 29.10.2014 um 02:33 schrieb Stephen Warren:
> On 10/27/2014 06:52 PM, Matthias Klein wrote:
>> The model B and B+ differ in the GPIO lines for ACT and PWR led.
>> The PWR led on the B+ model is active low.
> This new file is almost identical to bcm2835-rpi.dts. Perhaps we can use
> some include files to share the common portions so they aren't
> duplicated. Roughly:
>
> * Move all the common content from bcm2835-rpi.dts into bcm2835-rpi.dtsi.
>
> * Update bcm2835-rpi.dts to include bcm2835-rpi.dtsi to get all the
> common parts, and add the few lines of differences.
>
> * Update this patch similarly.
>
> Does that make sense?
Yes, I will work on such a patchset.

>
> A couple changes to this patch and the existing bcm2835-rpi.dts might
> reduce the differences even further, leading to more common code in
> bcm2835-rpi.dtsi:
>
> - Add the PWR LED to bcm2835-rpi-b.dts, if appropriate.
> - Add the I2S pinmux settings for B+ too.
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2835-rpi-b-plus.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm2835-rpi-b-plus.dts
> ...
>> +&mmc {
> That label doesn't exist; it should be &sdhci. Consequently:

Sorry, I based my patch on the wrong tree. I used 
https://github.com/pietrushnic/rpi-dt-linux/tree/rpi-3.17.y which 
contains non upstream commits.

Which tree should I use in general for work on the BCM2835? Is 
linux-next the right tree?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/