From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: khilman@baylibre.com (Kevin Hilman) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:27:19 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM64: dts: meson-gxm: Add R-Box Pro In-Reply-To: <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> ("Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber=22's?= message of "Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:06:07 +0100") References: <20170117030611.23827-1-afaerber@suse.de> <20170117030611.23827-2-afaerber@suse.de> <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> Message-ID: To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linus-amlogic.lists.infradead.org Andreas F?rber writes: > Am 17.01.2017 um 04:06 schrieb Andreas F?rber: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> index 0d7bfbf7d922..66bc809a5eae 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxl-nexbox-a95x.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-s912-q200.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-s912-q201.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-nexbox-a1.dtb > > What is the logic behind meson-gxm-s912-q201 vs. meson-gxm-nexbox-a1? > Should it be renamed to include -s912 for consistency? Oops, I think it should be renamed for consistency. I believe there's only one chip in the GXM family (S912) so it might be that we could either drop the -s912 from the q20x boards or, add it to the nexbox. I lean towards dropping the -s912 since there's a single chip in GXM. (FWIW, GXL has more than one chip in the family so we added the chip there.) >> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-rbox-pro.dtb > > Should this new board use meson-gxm-s912-? No. Unless Neil or you thing otherwise, I think we should send a patch to drop the -s912 from the q20x boards instead. (where "we" == Neil) ;) Kevin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: khilman@baylibre.com (Kevin Hilman) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:27:19 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM64: dts: meson-gxm: Add R-Box Pro In-Reply-To: <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> ("Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber=22's?= message of "Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:06:07 +0100") References: <20170117030611.23827-1-afaerber@suse.de> <20170117030611.23827-2-afaerber@suse.de> <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Andreas F?rber writes: > Am 17.01.2017 um 04:06 schrieb Andreas F?rber: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> index 0d7bfbf7d922..66bc809a5eae 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxl-nexbox-a95x.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-s912-q200.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-s912-q201.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-nexbox-a1.dtb > > What is the logic behind meson-gxm-s912-q201 vs. meson-gxm-nexbox-a1? > Should it be renamed to include -s912 for consistency? Oops, I think it should be renamed for consistency. I believe there's only one chip in the GXM family (S912) so it might be that we could either drop the -s912 from the q20x boards or, add it to the nexbox. I lean towards dropping the -s912 since there's a single chip in GXM. (FWIW, GXL has more than one chip in the family so we added the chip there.) >> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) += meson-gxm-rbox-pro.dtb > > Should this new board use meson-gxm-s912-? No. Unless Neil or you thing otherwise, I think we should send a patch to drop the -s912 from the q20x boards instead. (where "we" == Neil) ;) Kevin From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM64: dts: meson-gxm: Add R-Box Pro Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:27:19 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20170117030611.23827-1-afaerber@suse.de> <20170117030611.23827-2-afaerber@suse.de> <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <3005a457-b7cf-393b-42ff-4149e080321c@suse.de> ("Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber=22's?= message of "Wed, 18 Jan 2017 00:06:07 +0100") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= Cc: linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Catalin Marinas , Carlo Caione , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Andreas F=C3=A4rber writes: > Am 17.01.2017 um 04:06 schrieb Andreas F=C3=A4rber: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/= amlogic/Makefile >> index 0d7bfbf7d922..66bc809a5eae 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/Makefile >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) +=3D meson-gxl-nexbox-a95x.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) +=3D meson-gxm-s912-q200.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) +=3D meson-gxm-s912-q201.dtb >> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) +=3D meson-gxm-nexbox-a1.dtb > > What is the logic behind meson-gxm-s912-q201 vs. meson-gxm-nexbox-a1? > Should it be renamed to include -s912 for consistency? Oops, I think it should be renamed for consistency. I believe there's only one chip in the GXM family (S912) so it might be that we could either drop the -s912 from the q20x boards or, add it to the nexbox. I lean towards dropping the -s912 since there's a single chip in GXM. (FWIW, GXL has more than one chip in the family so we added the chip there.) >> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MESON) +=3D meson-gxm-rbox-pro.dtb > > Should this new board use meson-gxm-s912-? No. Unless Neil or you thing otherwise, I think we should send a patch to drop the -s912 from the q20x boards instead. (where "we" =3D=3D Neil) ;) Kevin