Re: [PATCH 4/9] PCI: mvebu: add support for reset on GPIO

[Sebastian Hesselbarth]

On 08/13/13 12:03, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:30:30AM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > Dear Thierry Reding,
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 10:09:56 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >
> > > > +- reset-gpios: optional gpio to PERST#
> > > > +- reset-delay-ms: delay in ms to wait after reset de-assertion
> > >
> > > I remember some recent discussion about this, and we now have this reset
> > > framework, so perhaps it makes more sense to use the reset binding for
> > > this? Cc'ing Stephen (as part of the device tree bindings maintainers
> > > team) who was involved in that recent reset bindings discussion.
> >
> > I also thought about this, but the reset framework seems to be designed
> > for "reset controller" IPs, i.e special IPs that are controlling reset
> > signals. Looking at Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reset/reset.txt,
> > I'm not sure to see how this would apply to GPIO-controlled reset
> > signals.
>
> See:
>
> 	http://www.mail-archive.com/devicetree-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg36900.html
>
> which seems to have carried over to this at some point:
>
> 	http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg00521.html
>
> Some of the messages in between I can't find in any archive, sorry.

Thierry, Sascha,

thanks for the input. Flipping through the above discussion, I guess
using "reset-gpios" and "reset-delay-us" should be fine?

I can also remove the delay property for now, as I cannot find a final
conclusion about the configurable delay.

In the driver, I will stick to bare gpiolib and wait for gpio-reset
driver to become available. Currently, we don't have sophisticated
reset handling in pci-mvebu anyway.

Sebastian

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