From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753086AbaE0R2T (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2014 13:28:19 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f172.google.com ([74.125.82.172]:41816 "EHLO mail-we0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753040AbaE0R2P (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2014 13:28:15 -0400 Message-ID: <5384CB29.1090204@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 19:28:09 +0200 From: Sebastian Hesselbarth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 To: Jason Cooper CC: Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Russell King , Andrew Lunn , Gregory Clement , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: mvebu: split SolidRun CuBox into variants References: <1401140009-31505-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <1401140009-31505-2-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <20140527161143.GS8664@titan.lakedaemon.net> In-Reply-To: <20140527161143.GS8664@titan.lakedaemon.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 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 05/27/2014 06:11 PM, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 11:33:29PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >> As Mainlining effort for SolidRun CuBox has been carried out on the >> Engineering Sample, the board DTS was reflecting this. Actually, >> SolidRun CuBox comes in three different variants: Engineering Sample (ES), >> production with 1GB RAM (1G), and production with 2GB RAM (2G). >> >> Therefore, we split the current dove-cubox.dts into a common board include >> and one board dts for each of the above variants. >> >> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth >> --- [...] >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 4 +++- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-1g.dts | 17 ++++++++++++++++ >> arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-2g.dts | 17 ++++++++++++++++ >> arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-es.dts | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> .../boot/dts/{dove-cubox.dts => dove-cubox.dtsi} | 17 ---------------- >> 5 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-1g.dts >> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-2g.dts >> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-es.dts >> rename arch/arm/boot/dts/{dove-cubox.dts => dove-cubox.dtsi} (86%) >> [...] >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-2g.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-2g.dts >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..513b6a68eba3 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dove-cubox-2g.dts >> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >> +/dts-v1/; >> + >> +#include "dove-cubox.dtsi" >> + >> +/ { >> + model = "SolidRun CuBox (2G)"; >> + compatible = "solidrun,cubox-2g", "solidrun,cubox", "marvell,dove"; >> + >> + memory { >> + device_type = "memory"; >> + reg = <0x00000000 0x80000000>; > > Do you anticipate any other differences between the 1G and the 2G? > Otherwise, I'm inclined to just have a "solidrun,cubox". The bootloader > should be setting the amount of RAM at boottime anyway. Given the minor differences between ES and production, instead of dove-cubox-common.dtsi +--> dove-cubox.dts (production) +--> dove-cubos-es.dts (engineering sample) we could also just have an "overlay" for the ES like dove-cubox.dts (production) +--> dove-cubox-es.dts (engineering sample) It is not used commonly until now, maybe just a matter of taste. Is there any version you prefer? Sebastian