Re: [PATCH v2] docs: dt-bindings: add DTS Coding Style document

From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] docs: dt-bindings: add DTS Coding Style document
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 20:31:13 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <acfdce81-f117-4a1a-a9fe-e2b4b8922adb@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdW4WPJT0Km7w8RWrGJaztk6QDGoFAn0bdGbrEsw81R1FA@mail.gmail.com>

On 20/11/2023 20:18, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 3:53 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 20/11/2023 15:01, Michal Simek wrote:> >
>>> On 11/20/23 09:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> Document preferred coding style for Devicetree sources (DTS and DTSI),
>>>> to bring consistency among all (sub)architectures and ease in reviews.
> 
>>>> +Organizing DTSI and DTS
>>>> +-----------------------
>>>> +
>>>> +The DTSI and DTS files should be organized in a way representing the common
>>>> +(and re-usable) parts of the hardware.  Typically this means organizing DTSI
>>>> +and DTS files into several files:
>>>> +
>>>> +1. DTSI with contents of the entire SoC (without nodes for hardware not present
>>>> +   on the SoC).
>>>> +2. If applicable: DTSI with common or re-usable parts of the hardware (e.g.
>>>> +   entire System-on-Module).
>>>
>>> DTS/DTSI - SOMs can actually run as they are that's why it is fair to say that
>>> there doesn't need to be DTS representing the board.
>>
>> I have never seen a SoM which can run without elaborate hardware-hacking
>> (e.g. connecting multiple wires to the SoM pins). The definition of the
>> SoM is that it is a module. Module can be re-used, just like SoC.
> 
> /me looks at his board farm...
> 
> The Renesas White-Hawk CPU board can be used standalone, and has a
> separate power input connector for this operation mode.  As it has RAM,
> Ethernet, serial console, eMMC, and even mini-DP, it can serve useful
> purposes on its own.
> I agree it's not a super-good example, as the board is not really a
> "SoM", and we currently don't have r8a779g0-white-hawk-cpu.dts, only
> r8a779g0-white-hawk-cpu.dtsi.
> 
> The RZ/A2M CPU Board is a real SoM, which can be powered over USB.
> It has less standard connectors (microSD, USB, MIPI CSI-2), but still
> sufficient features to be usable on its own.
> Again, we're doing a bad job, as we only have a DTS for the full eval
> board (r7s9210-rza2mevb.dts).
> 
> I guess there are (many) other examples...

OK, I never had such in my hands. Anyway, the SoM which can run
standalone  has a meaning of a board, so how exactly you want to
rephrase the paragraph?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

_______________________________________________
linux-amlogic mailing list
linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic