Re: [PATCH 0/9] arm64: introduce Black Sesame Technologies C1200 SoC and CDCU1.0 board

Ulf Hansson
2025-09-25T13:34:59Z

On Thu, 25 Sept 2025 at 14:12, Albert Yang <yangzh0906@thundersoft.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2025 at 05:03:57PM +0800, Albert Yang wrote:Subject: Re: [PATCH] splitting SoC and MMC parts
>
> Hi Arnd,
>
> I may have missed an important detail in my previous note. If I split
> out the MMC-related patches and submit only the SoC parts first, I
> cannot validate the SoC on real hardware: both the kernel and the root
> filesystem live on the MMC device. Without the MMC stack (DT bindings
> and the controller driver), the board does not boot to userspace, so I
> cannot properly verify the SoC/DT changes in isolation.

At least to me, I would not consider that a problem. As long as you
can test the pieces together "manually" that's fine, I think.

I mean, the platform was not supported in the first place, so it's not
like we would be introducing a regression - or break something, right?

>
> Would you prefer that I:
> - keep the MMC pieces in the same series for initial bring-up; or
> - validate everything locally, then send only the SoC/DT parts first and
> follow up with the MMC binding/driver as a separate series?
>
> I’m not entirely sure which approach best matches the normal workflow,
> so your guidance would be appreciated. I can proceed whichever way you
> think is most appropriate.

I think doing things in parallel would be the best/fastest way
forward. Validating locally and sending the pieces upstream to
different subsystems.

>
> Thanks for the review and suggestions.
>
> Best regards,
> Albert

Kind regards
Uffe