Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: bcm: add BCM53573 SoCs family binding

["Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>]

On 10.07.2023 19:24, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 10.07.2023 19:08, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 01:53:02PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>
>>> BCM53573 is a family derived from Northstar with some important
>>> differences:
>>> 1. Cortex-A9 replaced by Cortex-A7
>>> 2. XHCI controller dropped
>>> 3. Two Ethernet interfaces removed
>>> 4. Two 802.11ac cores embedded
>>>
>>> Linux already contains DTS files for some on those devices so add a
>>> proper binding for it.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>> ---
>>>   .../bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml       | 39 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..6e502d718518
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>
>> How come this is not dual licensed?
> 
> Somehow I got inspired by other Broadocm SoCs here. I'll relicense it though.
> 
> FWIW:
> $ grep "SPDX-License-Identifier" Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/*.yaml
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/bcm2835.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm11351.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm21664.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm23550.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm4708.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,bcmbca.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,cygnus.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,hr2.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,ns2.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,nsp.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,stingray.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/brcm,vulcan-soc.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm/raspberrypi,bcm2835-firmware.yaml:# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> 
> 
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/arm/bcm/brcm,bcm53573.yaml#
>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>> +
>>> +title: Broadcom BCM53573 SoCs family
>>
>> Title seems a little odd given the description.
>> "Broadcom Northstar derived Wi-Fi SoCs"?
> 
> Some team at Broadcom took Northstar family design, added their changes
> and they reference those SoCs as BCM53573 family. So I thought I should
> just stick with the name they chose.

I'm wondering if "derived" is a correct word in this case. I'm not
familiar with hardware design terminology. Maybe that is what causes a
confusion here?


>> Otherwise,
>> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>