Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for J7200 SoC

[Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>]

On 12:54-20200910, Suman Anna wrote:
[...]

> >> +		};
> > 
> > I think we could introduce base infrastructure stuff like intr and
> > inta nodes here? Also, the gpio_intr?
> 
> FYI, they are currently being added in Patch 1 from Grygorii's "[v2,0/4] arm64:
> dts: ti: k3-j7200: add dma and mcu cpsw" series,
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11763711/
> 
> The overall series seems to have some dependencies, so better to separate out
> those nodes and include as an additional add-on patch to this series, atleast it
> can unblock all others who use the TI-SCI Interrupt node.
> 

There is dependency on udma which in turn needs chipid stuff merged,
but I dont see anything preventing inta intr (which are infrastructure
components) from being merged in. It is not just udma driver that uses these
infrastructure.

[...]
> >> +
> >> +/ {
> >> +	model = "Texas Instruments K3 J7200 SoC";
> >> +	compatible = "ti,j7200";
> >> +	interrupt-parent = <&gic500>;
> >> +	#address-cells = <2>;
> >> +	#size-cells = <2>;
> >> +
> >> +	aliases {
> >> +		serial0 = &wkup_uart0;
> >> +		serial1 = &mcu_uart0;
> >> +		serial2 = &main_uart0;
> >> +		serial3 = &main_uart1;
> >> +		serial4 = &main_uart2;
> >> +		serial5 = &main_uart3;
> >> +		serial6 = &main_uart4;
> >> +		serial7 = &main_uart5;
> >> +		serial8 = &main_uart6;
> >> +		serial9 = &main_uart7;
> >> +		serial10 = &main_uart8;
> >> +		serial11 = &main_uart9;
> >> +	};
> >> +
> > 
> > might be nice to leave a chosen { }; here to indicate board
> > files fill it up.. just to maintain consistency with rest of SoC dtsis?
> 
> Doesn't serve any purpose IMO. I remember commenting about that blank node to
> remove it during some earlier reviews.

I know. just consistency for board files to add things in -> you can
see similar usage else where as well. if we are going to drop it, we might
drop from am65 and j721e as well. for bootloaders that look for the node, it
tends to be consistently present OR not.. I'd rather they be consistently
be available than to deal with mix for downstream boards. No strong feelings
either way, but.. lets stay consistent throughout.

$ git grep 'chosen { };' arch/arm64/boot/dts/
arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-merlin.dts: chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-mustang.dts:        chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dtsi:     chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/fvp-base-revc.dts:      chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/rtsm_ve-aemv8a.dts:     chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hip06-d03.dts:    chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173-evb.dts:    chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8916.dtsi:  chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8992.dtsi:  chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8994.dtsi:  chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi:  chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi:  chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm660.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8250.dtsi:   chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65.dtsi:    chosen { };
arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e.dtsi:   chosen { };

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D

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