From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: Exynos: Add generic compatible string Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:45:45 +0100 Message-ID: <5304A779.1060702@samsung.com> References: <1392809645-631-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:29622 "EHLO mailout3.w1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753431AbaBSMpt (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Feb 2014 07:45:49 -0500 Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244]) by mailout3.w1.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01(7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N1800CLUU4BH760@mailout3.w1.samsung.com> for linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 12:45:48 +0000 (GMT) In-reply-to: <1392809645-631-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Sachin Kamat , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org Cc: kgene.kim@samsung.com, arnd@arndb.de, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Olof Johansson Hi Sachin, [adding linux-arm-kernel ML to CC list] On 19.02.2014 12:34, Sachin Kamat wrote: > To avoid modifying the kernel every time a new SoC variant > comes out. > > Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat > --- > arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + > arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c | 1 + > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > index d3e54b7644d7..5d037b561253 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static void __init exynos4_dt_machine_init(void) > } > > static char const *exynos4_dt_compat[] __initdata = { > + "samsung,exynos4", > "samsung,exynos4210", > "samsung,exynos4212", > "samsung,exynos4412", > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > index 37ea261f0f6c..ad0db5a93da8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ static void __init exynos5_dt_machine_init(void) > } > > static char const *exynos5_dt_compat[] __initdata = { > + "samsung,exynos5", > "samsung,exynos5250", > "samsung,exynos5420", > "samsung,exynos5440", > Since all Exynos chips can be easily recognized using dedicated chip ID register, I wonder whether we really need to maintain two distinct board files for Exynos 4 and 5 series, especially when both of them are doing mostly the same set up, which can be simply generalized to cover all the cases. Instead of adding just another level of artificially fine grained compatible strings, I'd rather suggest merging both board files together and adding a single compatible string identifying all SoCs that can be further differentiated by using hardware chip ID register. What do you think? P.S. Please always keep respective subsystem/arch level MLs on CC list, in this case linux-arm-kernel. The linux-samsung-soc ML is just a convenience tool to group all threads about Samsung SoCs, not a way to bypass respective subsystem MLs. Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: t.figa@samsung.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:45:45 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ARM: Exynos: Add generic compatible string In-Reply-To: <1392809645-631-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> References: <1392809645-631-1-git-send-email-sachin.kamat@linaro.org> Message-ID: <5304A779.1060702@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Sachin, [adding linux-arm-kernel ML to CC list] On 19.02.2014 12:34, Sachin Kamat wrote: > To avoid modifying the kernel every time a new SoC variant > comes out. > > Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann > Signed-off-by: Sachin Kamat > --- > arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c | 1 + > arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c | 1 + > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > index d3e54b7644d7..5d037b561253 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos4-dt.c > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static void __init exynos4_dt_machine_init(void) > } > > static char const *exynos4_dt_compat[] __initdata = { > + "samsung,exynos4", > "samsung,exynos4210", > "samsung,exynos4212", > "samsung,exynos4412", > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > index 37ea261f0f6c..ad0db5a93da8 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach-exynos5-dt.c > @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ static void __init exynos5_dt_machine_init(void) > } > > static char const *exynos5_dt_compat[] __initdata = { > + "samsung,exynos5", > "samsung,exynos5250", > "samsung,exynos5420", > "samsung,exynos5440", > Since all Exynos chips can be easily recognized using dedicated chip ID register, I wonder whether we really need to maintain two distinct board files for Exynos 4 and 5 series, especially when both of them are doing mostly the same set up, which can be simply generalized to cover all the cases. Instead of adding just another level of artificially fine grained compatible strings, I'd rather suggest merging both board files together and adding a single compatible string identifying all SoCs that can be further differentiated by using hardware chip ID register. What do you think? P.S. Please always keep respective subsystem/arch level MLs on CC list, in this case linux-arm-kernel. The linux-samsung-soc ML is just a convenience tool to group all threads about Samsung SoCs, not a way to bypass respective subsystem MLs. Best regards, Tomasz