From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756339Ab1KRTao (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:30:44 -0500 Received: from mail-gy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:64226 "EHLO mail-gy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756176Ab1KRTal (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:30:41 -0500 Message-ID: <4EC6B25D.70708@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 13:30:37 -0600 From: Rob Herring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olof Johansson CC: Stephen Warren , Peter De Schrijver , Grant Likely , Randy Dunlap , Russell King , Colin Cross , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] arm/tegra: initial device tree for tegra30 References: <1321546766-26770-1-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> <1321546766-26770-2-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF1740D74C46@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <20111118184942.GA31678@quad.lixom.net> In-Reply-To: <20111118184942.GA31678@quad.lixom.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/18/2011 12:49 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:39:14AM -0800, Stephen Warren wrote: >> Peter De Schrijver wrote at Thursday, November 17, 2011 9:19 AM: >>> This patch adds the initial device tree for tegra30 >> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra.txt >> ... >>> +* harmony: tegra20 based development board >>> +Required root node properties: >>> + - compatible = "nvidia,harmony", "nvidia,tegra20"; >>> + >>> +* seaboard: tegra20 based clamshell reference design >>> +Required root node properties: >>> + - compatible = "nvidia,seaboard", "nvidia,tegra20"; >> >> Do we really want to list all the board names here? In the future, there >> could be tens or hundreds. I would argue that we should just document >> nvidia,tegra20 and nvidia,tegra30. > > Agreed. It's not really any different than mach-types which does have every board in it. I think if a board requires a new dts, then it needs a unique name. > >> At a later point, we should fix board-dt.c to solely look for those >> compatible values, although this will have to wait until the pinmux DT >> bindings are present. Then, the kernel won't care about the board names. > > Exactly. That is perfectly acceptable, but you should still have the option to do something specific for any given board. Rob