From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2729CC43387 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 22:35:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7E3720665 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 22:35:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="gsWBMJen" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D7E3720665 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=MPWtVihxJMKJoeeex5pBoXFu84ngGU3NbzhMyz8kPzo=; b=gsWBMJenxmqRqTJoaOzgr7u6n kWT9OJADLL6rG2WSCO+WkR0zFkF8Jq5ZzGlIinWc9b8UjIlOc3cPG4saxeVXLwvecNTD/3x9HXNAs f0dsucKBvR9OnIY2o5zpj0oFz6pdr+nN04vTYWmBJH4tr+ZxP27pzlRrvPxKFGXWkljiAMmWb3Rfl Hb72kIAzLxpmWSDluiXGz0bgcHe4CLLpnWT3oMVB5kBbW5rdKNFkMHmVhIgm1mBlwUj4j99O3tjwm 7CAr4Jk+j4RkGi1Kr3hmNdNR00FuTDUCuL256h7tXflZF40znoh8wDCJg0+o44HeC4MvNOhMoNPbZ yjstnWVWA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ggzyU-0005XY-1B; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 22:35:54 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ggzyQ-0005X6-Uv; Tue, 08 Jan 2019 22:35:52 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9296F80D; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 14:35:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.123] (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [217.140.101.70]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 455C73F5AF; Tue, 8 Jan 2019 14:35:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add DT for NanoPi M4 To: Heiko Stuebner References: <324b75bbeef2552ddde62f4e1834ac908a45bebd.1546981251.git.robin.murphy@arm.com> <1755553.je4OVlYtzY@phil> From: Robin Murphy Message-ID: Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 22:35:40 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1755553.je4OVlYtzY@phil> Content-Language: en-GB X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190108_143551_021337_7FA2C586 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.96 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Heiko, On 2019-01-08 10:15 pm, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > Hi Robin, > > Am Dienstag, 8. Januar 2019, 22:57:24 CET schrieb Robin Murphy: >> There are a number of subtle differences between the nanopi4 variants, >> and where they disagree, the common DTSI currently follows the details >> of NanoPi M4. In order to improve matters even more, let's add a >> separate DTS for the M4 to which we can start splitting things out >> appropriately. The third variant, NanoPi NEO4, is a lot closer to the M4 >> than either is to the larger T4, so arguably could get away with just >> sharing the M4 DT for now (plus I have neither of the smaller boards to >> actually test with). >> >> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy > > I'm not sure if Rob actually checks the devicetree list or relies on > patches Cc'ed directly to him for binding review, so you might want > to add the 2 dt maintainers explicitly. Er, that's embarassing... I somehow failed to register that my mindless copy-paste job ends up adding a new binding that *isn't* the one Rob already reviewed :( >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 5 +++++ >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/Makefile | 1 + >> .../boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-nanopi-m4.dts | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-nanopi-m4.dts >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml >> index bcc60c492a12..b4756e0cb7d0 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml >> @@ -92,6 +92,11 @@ properties: >> - const: friendlyarm,nanopc-t4 >> - const: rockchip,rk3399 >> >> + - description: FriendlyElec NanoPi M4 >> + items: >> + - const: friendlyarm,nanopi-m4 >> + - const: rockchip,rk3399 >> + > > When we hashed out the Rockchip yaml thingy, there also > came up the possibility of grouping the similar boards together > into an enum, see the rk3399-firefly or the rk3288-evb-* for example. > > So the binding for both could possibly become: > > - description: FriendlyElec NanoPi > items: > - enum: > - friendlyarm,nanopi-m4 > - friendlyarm,nanopi-t4 > - const: rockchip,rk3399 > > We didn't come up with a hard rule for all cases, but the > Nano PI feels like it qualifies ;-) ...but I completely agree with that idea anyway - as the commit log alludes to, this was really just somewhere to move the existing nodes to without much thought involved. I'll give it a day or two for any more comments, then respin at least this patch and make sure the binding update goes to the maintainers properly. Cheers, Robin. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel