[PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc/mpc5121: add initial support for PDM360NG board

Grant Likely grant.likely at secretlab.ca
Wed Jul 28 03:43:29 EST 2010

On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Anatolij Gustschin <agust at denx.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:58:33 -0600
> Grant Likely <grant.likely at secretlab.ca> wrote:
> ...
>> >> > +               spi at 11900 {
>> >> > +                       compatible = "fsl,mpc5121-psc-spi", "fsl,mpc5121-psc";
>> >> > +                       cell-index = <9>;
>> >>
>> >> Try to drop the cell-index properties.  They are almost always misused.
>> >
>> > Removing cell-index would require changing the spi driver's probe.
>> > Currently cell-index is used to set spi bus number. What could be used
>> > for bus enumeration instead? Is it okay to use part of the spi node
>> > address? e.g. obtaining the offset 0x11900, masking out the unrelated
>> > bits and shifting by 8 would deliver unique index 9 for PSC9 in SPI
>> > mode. This would work for all 12 PSC SPI controllers of mpc5121.
>> Does the spi bus number really matter?  The device tree context gives
>> you a firm association between spi masters and devices which doesn't
>> require assigning a specific bus number.  The core spi code can
>> dynamically assign a bus number for the bus by setting bus_num to -1.
> The bus number is used in the mpc5121 psc spi driver to obtain correct
> clock for PSC in question (0 to 11) and to enable the PSC clock at probe
> time. Therefore using dynamically assigned bus number would require another
> change to the spi driver.

That's unrelated to the bus number.  Use cell-index value directly for
obtaining the clock if you need to; but limit its exposure.  Once
Jeremy gets his common clock architecture merged, then we could
probably migrate to that for obtaining the correct clock without


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list