From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boris Brezillon Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] mtd: nand: gpmi: add i.MX 7 SoC support Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 11:17:58 +0200 Message-ID: <20170502111758.53e9a959@bbrezillon> References: <20170421010755.18025-1-stefan@agner.ch> <20170421010755.18025-3-stefan@agner.ch> <5cf26d2b020392c875464c7504a9fb5b@agner.ch> <8377dadc-043f-5932-cb13-3367db38a6dd@gmail.com> <494a7bc044457240a302d92b3a50b8e5@agner.ch> <57336d7e-7b48-8855-9e87-3eb370facd05@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Han Xu Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, Fabio Estevam , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Richard Weinberger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Agner , Marek Vasut , robh+dt@kernel.org, "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , Sascha Hauer , Han Xu , Cyrille Pitchen , Brian Norris , Shawn Guo , David Woodhouse , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, LW@karo-electronics.de List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Han, On Fri, 21 Apr 2017 13:29:16 -0500 Han Xu wrote: > >> > >>>>> But then, adding the type would only require 2-3 lines of change if I > >>>>> add it to the GPMI_IS_MX6 macro... > >>>> > >>>> Then at least add a comment because using type = IMX6SX right under > >>>> gpmi_data_mx7d can trigger some head-scratching. And put my R-B on V2. > >>> > >>> FWIW, I mentioned it in the commit message. > >>> > >>> I think rather then adding a comment it is cleaner to just add IS_IMX7D > >>> and add it to the GPMI_IS_MX6 macro. That does not need a comment since > >>> it implicitly says we have a i.MX 7 but treat it like i.MX 6 and it is a > >>> rather small change. Does that sound acceptable? > >> > >> Sure, that's even better, thanks. > >> > >> btw isn't there some single-core mx7 (mx7s ?) , maybe we should just go > >> with mx7 (without the d suffix). I dunno if it has GPMI NAND though, so > >> maybe mx7d is the right thing to do here ... > >> > > > > There is a Solo version yes, and it has GPMI NAND too. However, almost > > all i.MX 7 IPs have been named imx7d by NXP for some reason (including > > compatible strings, see grep -r -e imx7 Documentation/), so I thought I > > stay consistent here... > > Hi Guys, > > Yes, there should be a i.MX7 Solo version with one core fused out. IMO, can > we use QUIRK to distinguish them rather than SoC name. I know I also sent > some patch set with SoC Name but I prefer to use QUIRK now. Not sure what this means. Are you okay with Stefan's v2? Regards, Boris