From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] arm64: dts: stratix10: Add OCRAM EDAC node References: <1548179287-21760-1-git-send-email-thor.thayer@linux.intel.com> <1548179287-21760-5-git-send-email-thor.thayer@linux.intel.com> From: Dinh Nguyen Message-ID: <4763af33-0cae-bc82-8963-41554ee56ea5@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 10:56:55 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1548179287-21760-5-git-send-email-thor.thayer@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: thor.thayer@linux.intel.com, bp@alien8.de, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, mchehab@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 1/22/19 11:48 AM, thor.thayer@linux.intel.com wrote: > From: Thor Thayer > > Add the OCRAM ECC node following the Arria10 format. > > Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer > --- > v2 No changes > --- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi > index 8253a1a9e985..a625dc472b91 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi > @@ -494,6 +494,13 @@ > interrupts = <16 4>, <48 4>; > }; > > + ocram-ecc@ff8cc000 { > + compatible = "altr,socfpga-a10-ocram-ecc"; Are you absolutely sure there are no differences in the Stratix10 versus A10? I wonder if it would be safer to have a platform specific binding for Stratix10 rather than re-using A10. It would prevent from having to change bindings later. Dinh