Re: [RFC] arm64: dts: freescale: Supporting Variscite SoM and carrier revisions

[Stefano Radaelli <stefano.radaelli21@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 11:37:04AM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> 
> Is it for created dtb file? We generally doesn't finial results.
> 

I meant the source .dts filenames committed to the kernel tree,
as well as the resulting .dtb filenames.

Would a name such as imx8mm-var-dart-2.0-sonata-1.0.dts be acceptable
upstream, including both the SoM and carrier hardware revisions?
We would keep that filename unchanged when later compatible
revisions can use the same description.

> 
> It should be fine only if dts can be shared. It is okay to generate differe
> combination dtb file by using makefile.
> 

Thanks. Our proposed approach is to share the common and
revision-specific descriptions through .dtsi files, with small
top-level .dts files selecting the appropriate SoM/carrier
combination through includes. We would then list the corresponding
.dtb targets in the Makefile and compile them into complete DTBs
that the bootloader can load directly.

> 
> Yes, need revision-specific compatible string.
> 
> compatible = "SoM2.1-carrier-0.1", "SoMv2.0-carrier-0.2", ....
> 

Understood. When a new revision can share the existing description,
we would add its revision-specific compatible to the same DTS,
retain the existing strings, and update the corresponding binding.

For example, if SoM v2.1 on Sonata v1.0 can use the same description
as SoM v2.0 on Sonata v1.0, we would add the new compatible to the
existing DTS. The resulting DTB would continue to serve both
revisions under the same filename, provided that the description
and all declared compatibilities remain correct for both.

Thanks,
Stefano