Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: socfpga: Add the Agilex7 series SoC's

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-04-17T06:43:23Z

On 16/04/2026 17:20, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
>
>
> On 4/14/26 07:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 14/04/2026 14:53, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/14/26 02:17, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 09:45:52AM -0500, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
>>>>> The Agilex7 is a series of devices from Altera that are derived from
>>>>> the Agilex family.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Agilex7F device supports PCIE 4.0 and DDR4. The Agilex7I device supports
>>>>> PCIE 5.0 and DDR4, while the Agilex7M device supports DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5
>>>>> and PCIE 5.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> All other peripherals from these devices are the same as the Agilex
>>>>> device.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera.yaml | 10 ++++++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera.yaml
>>>>> index 206686f3eebc..5ee09f8d4698 100644
>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera.yaml
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/altera.yaml
>>>>> @@ -115,6 +115,16 @@ properties:
>>>>> - intel,socfpga-agilex5-socdk-nand
>>>>> - const: intel,socfpga-agilex5
>>>>>
>>>>> + - description: Agilex7 series F, I and M boards
>>>>> + items:
>>>>> + - enum:
>>>>> + - intel,socfpga-agilex7m-socdk
>>>>> + - enum:
>>>>> + - intel,socfpga-agilex7f
>>>>> + - intel,socfpga-agilex7i
>>>>> + - intel,socfpga-agilex7m
>>>>> + - const: intel,socfpga-agilex
>>>>
>>>> And separate question - why previous soc "agilex" is used as fallback?
>>>> Even more confusing.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're right. Sorry for the confusion. The Agilex7M, I, F devices are
>>> basically "agilex" devices with some few additions (PCIE, DDR5). Maybe I
>>> should place the Agilex7M/I/F devices into the "agilex" boards area?
>>
>> Compatibles should be specific and not based on families, thus what is
>> "intel,socfpga-agilex"? SoC, right?
>>
>> Then "intel,socfpgaa-agilex7f" is a new SoC, no?
>>
>
> The Agilex7 is re-branded name for the original Agilex soc,
> "intel, socfga-agilex". From a software perspective, they are the same
> device. I looked over the commits to see how I could handle a
> rebranding, but couldn't come up with a conclusion.

The family does not matter. What is "socfga-agilex"? One given soc. Not
a family.

>
> I could create a new SoC like you've suggested:
>
> + - description: Agilex7m boards
> + items:
> + - enum:
> + - altr,socfpga-agilex7m-socdk
> + - const: altr,socfpga-agilex7m
> + - const: altr,socfpga-agilex7

So what is "altr,socfpga-agilex7"? Why SoC has two compatibles?

>
> Or I can use the original "intel,socfpga-agilex"?
>
> + - description: Agilex7m boards
> + items:
> + - enum:
> + - altr,socfpga-agilex7m-socdk
> + - const: altr,socfpga-agilex7m
> + - const: altr,socfpga-agilex

But why? Why are you using one SoC compatible in other context? It's
really no different than all other SoCs.

>
> If I create a new "altr,socfpga-agilex7" binding, then I would have to
> add the new binding to a few drivers. But if I use the original
> "intel,socfpga-agilex", then no drivers will need to be updated.

You anyway MUST have new binding for each device. Please carefully
follow writing bindings and DTS 101.

Best regards,
Krzysztof