From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1F8DCD6E78 for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 15:17:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To: Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=76rgH9fBfkC4HyBMGXCsLPArwF/PxQ46836621QMqO4=; b=crAfUmw6tqFOF/ 7po4rl6yeOslTacseuR+3WIJfDKIJaL195qmgcP57wnjnzLRrZjFgt3iBEWBImAD7yW2vr6PXldgx WpV5sNd3KaiX5meZ+ELKT2RAU8Is4wlfSXC+S3JOov8k1rQynIB/o+WvlkXNo+reFIOP21tcbHFoF XJro6jb9GTdu7iy0QeFFjWetwPkscuHos60zSXwpULJg1RWNztYU2v1pH2DORSgdLSOYjUUSTPPVu F3n50eA3Y8ix1P8Q4wuvlZ+zZLzf8Ru6/lGQCjy6rFf4ldVUGU0bsJU/w3gcDb3ahET9ktzITDCZB hPc5yTXsNJzRmghx82HQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vJZ4E-0000000AhRL-0qPa; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 15:16:58 +0000 Received: from freeshell.de ([2a01:4f8:231:482b::2]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vJZ45-0000000AhB6-3N30 for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 15:16:52 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freeshell.de; s=s2025; t=1763046978; bh=5AGNvaURvHGKAavyDt3SYJlevQsgOCQzedVhKN3nGVw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=hXL+fFSt1lF8fqaJhdWEA3T+ShmM5u/Xbf2lHvu3gDBmJqfAIZnz90g8kW1bkujvH px5RxeqKofIflhoz0eTfbb9T5DxdtDorPZFcXz9FS3JKdz71pKojqBBaVOIxRyGjwH lCNjQVnpwYI6vPbmUiH1wKlm91jOCWG3uAvOwn90fw4uSS7EJHp84vp4p0MWm7I1O6 LncojllfI5h8FEhShvcfF/nCceH0btWwhhkd2m6Uw2mGwqKZnPFE4dHYCh0AUk4cUN jT1stvHhQkdvhp9/fzCc0pX229Tp8PlDHqKeBSoCpw/8aEIzf9WuFdXfD5oZXncwd9 j9t+Ab9nUJqTw== Received: from [192.168.2.54] (unknown [74.244.53.222]) (Authenticated sender: e) by freeshell.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AFF95B2202BC; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 16:16:14 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4a55301a-ef7e-4b47-8151-621cfba36ddd@freeshell.de> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 07:16:12 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Add support for StarFive VisionFive 2 Lite board To: Emil Renner Berthing , Albert Ou , Bjorn Helgaas , Conor Dooley , Hal Feng , Heinrich Schuchardt , Krzysztof Kozlowski , =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Manivannan Sadhasivam , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Rob Herring , Viresh Kumar Cc: "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20251107095530.114775-1-hal.feng@starfivetech.com> Content-Language: en-US From: E Shattow In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20251113_071650_406143_F0ACD636 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.93 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 11/13/25 02:42, Emil Renner Berthing wrote: > Quoting Hal Feng (2025-11-13 04:42:05) >>> On 12.11.25 21:54, Emil Renner Berthing wrote: >>> Quoting Hal Feng (2025-11-07 10:55:22) >>>> VisionFive 2 Lite is a mini SBC based on the StarFive JH7110S >>>> industrial SoC which can run at -40~85 degrees centigrade and up to >>>> 1.25GHz. > [...] >>> Currently the JH7110 device trees are layed out like this, with a nice separation >>> between the SoC description and board descriptions: >>> >>> jh7110.dtsi # JH7110 SoC description >>> |- jh7110-common.dtsi # Peripherals common to all JH7110 boards >>> |- jh7110-starfive-visionfive-2.dtsi # Peripherals common to VF2 boards >>> | |- # Final VF2 board descriptions >>> |- jh7110-milkv-marscm.dtsi # Peripherals common to Mars CM boards >>> | |- # Final Mars CM board descriptions >>> |- # Other JH7110 board descriptions >>> >>> With this series it moves to >>> >>> jh711x.dtsi >>> |- jh711x-common.dtsi >>> |- jh7110-common.dtsi >>> | |- >>> |- jh7110s-common.dtsi >>> |- >>> >>> ..which I can't even give clear labels like above. In other words when new >>> patches are sent in it would not be easy to explain exactly where each change >>> should go and why. >>> I'm also worried that you'll find that more of the peripherals on the JH7110S >>> need special handling and a new jh7110s-... compatible string. Then I guess >>> they'll need to jump from jh7110x.dtsi two levels down to jh7110{,s}- >>> common.dtsi which then both describe SoC and board properties. >>> >>> If you're serious about calling this a new SoC then I'd expect something more >>> like this: >>> >>> jh711x.dtsi # Peripherals common to both SoCs >>> |- jh7110.dtsi # JH7110 SoC description >>> | |- jh7110-common.dtsi # Peripherals common to all JH7110 boards >>> | |- jh7110-starfive-visionfive-2.dtsi # Peripherals common to VF2 boards >>> | | |- # Final VF2 board descriptions >>> | |- jh7110-milkv-marscm.dtsi # Peripherals common to Mars CM boards >>> | | |- # Final Mars CM board descriptions >>> | |- # Other JH7110 board descriptions >>> |- jh7110s.dtsi # JH7110S SoC description >>> |- jh7110s-common.dtsi # Peripherals common to all JH7110S boards >>> |- # Final JH7110S board descriptions >>> >>> I know this will mean some duplication in jh7110{,s}-common.dtsi, but I >>> would prefer that to not having a clear explanation of what each file describes. >>> >>> Do you think this layout could work for you? >> >> Yeah, it is clearer for developers and maintainers. >> >> Considering Conor's suggestion, what about: >> >> jh7110.dtsi # JH7110 SoC description >> |- jh7110-common.dtsi # Peripherals common to all JH7110 boards >> |- jh7110-starfive-visionfive-2.dtsi # Peripherals common to VF2 boards >> | |- # Final VF2 board descriptions >> |- jh7110-milkv-marscm.dtsi # Peripherals common to Mars CM boards >> | |- # Final Mars CM board descriptions >> |- # Other JH7110 board descriptions >> |- >> JH-7110 and JH-7110I reference docs are listed (not any JH-7110S) at: https://doc-en.rvspace.org/Doc_Center/datasheet_0.html Does the JH-7110I use the OPP table for JH-7110 or JH-7110S? >> Move the opp table from jh7110.dtsi to jh7110-common.dtsi. >> Remove jh7110s-common.dtsi, because only one board uses JH7110S now. > > This patchset adds 2 different boards. Has this changed? > > Also this would mean that you're not using the starfive,jh7110s compatible or > any other starfive,jh7110s-.. compatible strings, so effectively you're not > treating it as a new chip, but just a board that needs a different opp table. > > I see now that the opp table is effectively the only difference between the two > chips in this patchset, so if that's closer to reality then what you suggest is > fine with me. > > /Emil Are we now re-visiting Hal's suggestion then (during code review for Milk-V Mars CM and Mars CM Lite) to split out the OPP tables and make them per-board, as before introduction of the StarFive VisionFive 2 Lite board(s) ? Can we then do as from where we are now before this series: - Move "the JH-7110" OPP table into jh7110-common-opp-1500.dtsi - Each board jh7110-{deepcomputing,milkv,pine64,starfive}*.dts includes said OPP dtsi file. and for this series: - Drop the adding of a new compatible - Add "the JH-7110S" OPP table into jh7110-common-opp-1250.dtsi - Use existing jh7110-* prefix for "JH-7110S" board dtsi and dts, include jh7110-common.dtsi as usual, and include jh7110-common-opp-1250.dtsi The exact filename pattern for the OPP tables I suggest here are approximations, however that idea is my suggestion if we're just doing a breakout of the tables and not a new compatible. I am positive on having the 1250MHz OPP tables split out into dtsi instead of stuffing them into the VisionFive 2 Lite common dtsi. That's all it is? -E _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv