[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Maxime Ripard]

There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.

Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
which also share the same SoC codename.

So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files

Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile                         |    4 ++--
 ...n4i-cubieboard.dts => sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dts} |    4 ++--
 arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun4i.dtsi => sun4i-a10.dtsi}   |    0
 ...sun5i-olinuxino.dts => sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dts} |    4 ++--
 arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun5i.dtsi => sun5i-a13.dtsi}   |    0
 5 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
 rename arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun4i-cubieboard.dts => sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dts} (87%)
 rename arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun4i.dtsi => sun4i-a10.dtsi} (100%)
 rename arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun5i-olinuxino.dts => sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dts} (86%)
 rename arch/arm/boot/dts/{sun5i.dtsi => sun5i-a13.dtsi} (100%)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
index 4dd567b..021d480 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile
@@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SPEAR3XX)+= spear300-evb.dtb \
 	spear310-evb.dtb \
 	spear320-evb.dtb
 dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SPEAR6XX)+= spear600-evb.dtb
-dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun4i-cubieboard.dtb \
-	sun5i-olinuxino.dtb
+dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dtb \
+	sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dtb
 dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_TEGRA) += tegra20-harmony.dtb \
 	tegra20-medcom-wide.dtb \
 	tegra20-paz00.dtb \
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-cubieboard.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dts
similarity index 87%
rename from arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-cubieboard.dts
rename to arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dts
index f4ca126..5cab825 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-cubieboard.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10-cubieboard.dts
@@ -11,11 +11,11 @@
  */
 
 /dts-v1/;
-/include/ "sun4i.dtsi"
+/include/ "sun4i-a10.dtsi"
 
 / {
 	model = "Cubietech Cubieboard";
-	compatible = "cubietech,cubieboard", "allwinner,sun4i";
+	compatible = "cubietech,a10-cubieboard", "allwinner,sun4i-a10";
 
 	aliases {
 		serial0 = &uart0;
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i.dtsi
rename to arch/arm/boot/dts/sun4i-a10.dtsi
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-olinuxino.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dts
similarity index 86%
rename from arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-olinuxino.dts
rename to arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dts
index d6ff889..498a091 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-olinuxino.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13-olinuxino.dts
@@ -12,11 +12,11 @@
  */
 
 /dts-v1/;
-/include/ "sun5i.dtsi"
+/include/ "sun5i-a13.dtsi"
 
 / {
 	model = "Olimex A13-Olinuxino";
-	compatible = "olimex,a13-olinuxino", "allwinner,sun5i";
+	compatible = "olimex,a13-olinuxino", "allwinner,sun5i-a13";
 
 	chosen {
 		bootargs = "earlyprintk console=ttyS0,115200";
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i.dtsi
rename to arch/arm/boot/dts/sun5i-a13.dtsi
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Wednesday 12 December 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
> and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
> same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.
> 
> Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
> which also share the same SoC codename.
> 
> So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
> name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>

Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Side note:
I just read about the A20 and A31, is there any information and/or
source code available for those already, or are they again kept
hidden by Allwinner?

	Arnd

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Maxime Ripard]

Hi Arnd,

Le 13/12/2012 13:00, Arnd Bergmann a ?crit :
> On Wednesday 12 December 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
>> and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
>> same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.
>>
>> Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
>> which also share the same SoC codename.
>>
>> So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
>> name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Will you take it directly, or do you want a pull request?

> Side note:
> I just read about the A20 and A31, is there any information and/or
> source code available for those already, or are they again kept
> hidden by Allwinner?

There's been a tablet announced with an A31 running Android (the Onda
V972), so I guess we can expect a source drop sometime soon, but for the
A20, I don't know. It looks like Allwinner even removed all references
to that SoC on their website, so...

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Arnd,
>
> Le 13/12/2012 13:00, Arnd Bergmann a ?crit :
>> On Wednesday 12 December 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>>> There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
>>> and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
>>> same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.
>>>
>>> Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
>>> which also share the same SoC codename.
>>>
>>> So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
>>> name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> Will you take it directly, or do you want a pull request?

We can take it directly, but I'm not picking up patches until after
the final 4 branches have been sent up and merged.



-Olof

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Alejandro Mery]

On 13/12/12 13:00, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 December 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
>> and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
>> same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.
>>
>> Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
>> which also share the same SoC codename.
>>
>> So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
>> name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> Side note:
> I just read about the A20 and A31, is there any information and/or
> source code available for those already, or are they again kept
> hidden by Allwinner?

currently they don't even sell A20 samples, and it was mostly removed 
from their website (to not compete with the A31 I suppose). for the A31 
Tsvetan (olimex.com) was told not even the short datasheet (pins and 
features) is written yet, and no devkits are available. All A31-based 
products currently designed (PCBs) and integrated (android) within 
Allwinner walls.

Chances are very high that the SDKs for these are similar to sun5i ones, 
i.e. with all allwinner code provided as .o/.ko only... and just enough 
.h files to be able to compile drivers.

<rant>ARM should *force* all their licensees to respect the GPL. They 
are profiting for this immoral negligence and that puts ARM itself in 
the same bucket.</rant>

cheers,
Alejandro Mery

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Russell King - ARM Linux]

On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:34:57AM +0100, Alejandro Mery wrote:
> <rant>ARM should *force* all their licensees to respect the GPL. They  
> are profiting for this immoral negligence and that puts ARM itself in  
> the same bucket.</rant>

Only the copyright holders or agents acting on their behalf have the
legal power to do that.

Also, it's not in ARMs interest to become a GPL enforcement agency for
Linux kernel - their motivation here is to sell more ARM CPUs to that
their revenue from their licenses continues to increase, and going after
people like this would be counter-productive to that goal.

However, there are organisations setup specifically to deal directly
with infringements of open source software licenses on behalf of their
copyright holders, and a number of Linux kernel copyright holders have
"signed up" with them.

[PATCHv2] ARM: sunxi: Change device tree naming scheme for sunxi

[Olof Johansson]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 05:08:23PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> There is several different SoCs sharing the sun5i codename: A10s, A12
> and A13. Since there is enough differences to not consider those the
> same SoCs, change a bit the naming scheme to reflect this.
> 
> Moreover, some boards like the olinuxino come in A10s and A13 variants,
> which also share the same SoC codename.
> 
> So change the naming scheme to reflect both the codename and the market
> name of the SoCs used in the dtsi and in the board files
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>


Applied, replacing the previous version I claimed to have applied. ;)


-Olof