From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: imx8mm: Remove incorrect fallback compatible for ocotp Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 11:17:28 +0200 Message-ID: <20190911091728.GA10331@linaro.org> References: <1568211887-19318-1-git-send-email-Anson.Huang@nxp.com> <749f8dc6-dbf9-127c-9924-33432b8af00a@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Anson Huang Cc: "robh+dt@kernel.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "shawnguo@kernel.org" , "s.hauer@pengutronix.de" , "kernel@pengutronix.de" , "festevam@gmail.com" , Leonard Crestez , Jacky Bai , Daniel Baluta , Jun Li , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , dl-linux-imx List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:05:49AM +0000, Anson Huang wrote: > Hi, Daniel > > > On 11/09/2019 16:24, Anson Huang wrote: > > > Compared to i.MX7D, i.MX8MM has different ocotp layout, so it should > > > NOT use "fsl,imx7d-ocotp" as ocotp's fallback compatible, remove it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anson Huang > > > --- > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mm.dtsi | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mm.dtsi > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mm.dtsi > > > index 5f9d0da..7c4dcce 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mm.dtsi > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mm.dtsi > > > @@ -426,7 +426,7 @@ > > > }; > > > > > > ocotp: ocotp-ctrl@30350000 { > > > - compatible = "fsl,imx8mm-ocotp", "fsl,imx7d- > > ocotp", "syscon"; > > > + compatible = "fsl,imx8mm-ocotp", "syscon"; > > > reg = <0x30350000 0x10000>; > > > clocks = <&clk IMX8MM_CLK_OCOTP_ROOT>; > > > /* For nvmem subnodes */ > > > > Why not fold the two patches? > > For i.MX8MM, it just removes the incorrect fallback compatible, for i.MX8MN, it needs > to replace the incorrect fallback compatible in order to support SoC UID read, so I think > this should be 2 separate patch? Oh, yes, there is a subtle difference in the file name :) m|n. I understand now why you splitted it. -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog