[U-Boot] [PATCH] arm: socfpga: Add support for the Terasic DE-0 Atlas board

Marek Vasut
2015-09-02T08:05:21Z

On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 11:37:20 PM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 05:12:40 PM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> >> On 09/01/2015 03:33 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> > On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 09:38:23 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> >> On Tue 2015-09-01 00:23:49, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >> >>> On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 09:57:05 PM,
> >> >>> dinguyen at opensource.altera.com
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>>> From: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@opensource.altera.com>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Add support for the Terasic DE0-Nano/Atlas-SoC Kit, which is a
> >> >>>> CycloneV based board. The board can boot from SD/MMC. Ethernet is a
> >> >>>> bit different because it has a KSZ9031 PHY, so for now, ethernet
> >> >>>> doesn't quite work yet, as a few patches are needed to support the
> >> >>>> PHY.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I thought we did support the KSZ9031 PHY. What's the problem ?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@opensource.altera.com>
> >> >>>> ---
> >> >>>> Hi Marek,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> This patch is based on your u-boot-socfpga/wip/boards branch.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> OK, that makes sense.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> Thanks,
> >> >>>> Dinh
> >> >>>> ---
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 +
> >> >>>> arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts | 61 +++
> >> >>>> arch/arm/mach-socfpga/Kconfig | 7 +
> >> >>>> board/terasic/de0/MAINTAINERS | 5 +
> >> >>>> board/terasic/de0/Makefile | 9 +
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I think it might be clearer to rename it to de0-nano-soc, what do
> >> >>> you think ? What's the difference between de0-nano-soc and atlas
> >> >>> btw ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Unless they are going to make "de0-mega".. I'd say "de0" is clean
> >> >> enough.
> >> >
> >> > They already make de0-cv , which is cycloneV SoC based, so de0 is not
> >> > clear enough, no way. They also make de0-nano , which is cycloneIV
> >> > based (without soc).
> >>
> >> After looking around the site a bit more, I think "de0_nano_sockit" is
> >> more appropriate?
> >
> > It's de0-nano-soc, that's what they call it on that website, right ?
> > SoCkit is a separate board.
>
> Ah yes, it's de0-nano-soc<space>kit. So "de0-nano-soc" ?

Yeah, exactly :)

Best regards,
Marek Vasut