| Message ID | 20180804231114.21420-3-erosca@de.adit-jv.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Delegated to: | Simon Horman |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add minimal DTS support for M3-N Starter Kit | expand |
Hi Eugeniu > In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's > rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any > SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) > should be successfully covered by making use of existing > "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" I'm not sure detail, but does it mean, both H3/M3 board can boot/work with "renesas,ulcb" compatible if we had such driver/soc ? > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > index d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: > compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" > - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) > H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) > - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > - Henninger > compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" > - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: > - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) > compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" > - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) > - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) > compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" > - Porter (M2-LCDP) My opinion is that if you want to exchange compatible name, related all driver/document should be exchanged in same patch. For example, above "h3ulcb" case, patch subject indicates "rename h3ulcb" or something, and it include [03/14][04/14][05/14][06/14]. Same for m3
Hi Morimoto-san, Thank you for your comments. On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 12:33:34AM +0000, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > Hi Eugeniu > > > In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's > > rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any > > SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) > > should be successfully covered by making use of existing > > "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. > > > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > I'm not sure detail, but > does it mean, both H3/M3 board can boot/work with > "renesas,ulcb" compatible if we had such driver/soc ? First, assuming latest vanilla v4.18-rc8 kernel, neither "renesas,salvator-x[s]" nor "renesas,(m3|h3)ulcb" compatibles are used anywhere outside of DTS and DT bindings documentation: $ git grep -E --name-only "renesas,(h3ulcb|m3ulcb|salvator-x)" | xargs dirname | sort -u arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm Since there is no driver using these compatibles, no functional breakage is expected by changing the compatible format/name. Secondly, as pointed out in the commit summary line and description, there is an overlap in scope between the SoC-level compatibles and ULCB board-level compatibles, which doesn't happen for Salvator-X{S} targets and creates some inconsistency. This inconsistency now spawns debates about how other ULCB-based board compatibles should be named and for that single reason IMO should be fixed. Lastly, I don't think any driver will ever need to use "renesas,(m3|m3n|h3)ulcb" string, since it is too broad. On/off-chip IP-oriented compatibles are probably better candidates for that. > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > index d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: > > compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" > > - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) > > H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) > > - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > > - Henninger > > compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" > > - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) > > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: > > - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) > > compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" > > - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) > > - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > > - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) > > compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" > > - Porter (M2-LCDP) > > My opinion is that if you want to exchange compatible name, > related all driver/document should be exchanged in same patch. AFAIK Simon maintains a number of branches hosting solely the DT bindings. More precisely it is the "dt-bindings-for-v4.*" branch series in https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/horms/renesas.git For that reason, IMO it might be worth to detach the document updates from DTS updates. I have no problems squashing the DTS and doc patches into one single commit, but before doing that I would appreciate a confirmation from the maintainer. Anyhow, many thanks for your feedback! > > For example, above "h3ulcb" case, patch subject indicates > "rename h3ulcb" or something, and it include [03/14][04/14][05/14][06/14]. > Same for m3 It was my impression that the DTS patches are always partitioned per-file, to avoid misleading globbing patterns in the commit subjects and allow easier DTS commit porting to future SoCs/boards. I will gladly follow your suggestion once I get the confirmation from maintainer. Thank you very much! Best regards, Eugeniu.
Hi Eugeniu, Thank you for the patch. On Sunday, 5 August 2018 02:11:02 EEST Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's > rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any > SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) > should be successfully covered by making use of existing > "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" This bothers me more than the naming convention in patch 01/14, as this change would completely hide differences between the H3 and M3-N versions of the ULCB. Compatible strings are listed in a decreasing order of specificity, and having "renesas,ulcb" as the most-specific compatible string means that the two boards are supposed to be identical, while they are not. > Relevant DTS changes come in separate per-DTS commits. > > Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt index > d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: > compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" > - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) > H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) > - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > - Henninger > compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" > - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: > - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) > compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" > - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) > - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) > compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" > - Porter (M2-LCDP)
Hi Laurent, On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:38 PM Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > On Sunday, 5 August 2018 02:11:02 EEST Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > > In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's > > rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any > > SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) > > should be successfully covered by making use of existing > > "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. > > > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > This bothers me more than the naming convention in patch 01/14, as this change > would completely hide differences between the H3 and M3-N versions of the > ULCB. Compatible strings are listed in a decreasing order of specificity, and > having "renesas,ulcb" as the most-specific compatible string means that the > two boards are supposed to be identical, while they are not. AFAIK the boards are identical (cfr. ), except for the SiP mounted. Cfr. e.g. the combined R-Car_StarterKit_Gen3_H3_M3_DEV_Rev.053.pdf ("Renesas R-Car H3/M3 Device Manual", incl. schematics). Hence to me the patch makes sense (modulo out-of-tree dependencies on the old compatible values). > > Relevant DTS changes come in separate per-DTS commits. > > > > Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt index > > d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: > > compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" > > - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) > > H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) > > - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > > - Henninger > > compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" > > - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) > > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: > > - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) > > compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" > > - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) > > - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > > - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) > > compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" > > - Porter (M2-LCDP) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 1:13 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:38 PM Laurent Pinchart > <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, 5 August 2018 02:11:02 EEST Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > > > In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's > > > rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any > > > SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) > > > should be successfully covered by making use of existing > > > "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. > > > > > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > > > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > > > This bothers me more than the naming convention in patch 01/14, as this change > > would completely hide differences between the H3 and M3-N versions of the > > ULCB. Compatible strings are listed in a decreasing order of specificity, and > > having "renesas,ulcb" as the most-specific compatible string means that the > > two boards are supposed to be identical, while they are not. > > AFAIK the boards are identical (cfr. ), except for the SiP mounted. > Cfr. e.g. the combined R-Car_StarterKit_Gen3_H3_M3_DEV_Rev.053.pdf > ("Renesas R-Car H3/M3 Device Manual", incl. schematics). Sorry, the schematics are in a separate file R-Car_StarterKit_Gen3_SCH_Rev.110.pdf with title "R-Car_Gen3 Starterkit", for both the Pro and Premier versions. But "ULCB" is an unofficial name. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
Hi Eugeniu Thank you for your reply > > > Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: > > > - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > > - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" > > > > I'm not sure detail, but > > does it mean, both H3/M3 board can boot/work with > > "renesas,ulcb" compatible if we had such driver/soc ? > > First, assuming latest vanilla v4.18-rc8 kernel, neither > "renesas,salvator-x[s]" nor "renesas,(m3|h3)ulcb" compatibles are > used anywhere outside of DTS and DT bindings documentation: (snip) > Since there is no driver using these compatibles, no functional > breakage is expected by changing the compatible format/name. Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the legs") Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem for me (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. This means "matched to more generic compatible") > > My opinion is that if you want to exchange compatible name, > > related all driver/document should be exchanged in same patch. (snip) > For that reason, IMO it might be worth to detach the document updates > from DTS updates. I have no problems squashing the DTS and doc patches > into one single commit, but before doing that I would appreciate a > confirmation from the maintainer. Anyhow, many thanks for your feedback! (snip) > It was my impression that the DTS patches are always partitioned > per-file, to avoid misleading globbing patterns in the commit subjects > and allow easier DTS commit porting to future SoCs/boards. I will > gladly follow your suggestion once I get the confirmation from > maintainer. Oops, I noticed that Simon was requested from ARM maintainer(?) to merge/reduce patches Let's follow Simon's opinion (This kind of "patch categorize" is based on each ML...) Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
Hi Eugeniu, again > Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. > But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT > (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the legs") > Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, > "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, > both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. > Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem for me > (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. > This means "matched to more generic compatible") "renesas,ulcb" is very generic naming. Not only h3/m3, if we had v3/e3/d3 etc ulcb, and if we had such compatible driver/soc, it needs to match to all ulcb. In reality, maybe we don't create such compatible driver, though. But, I don't know, I can follow to maintainer opinion. Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
Hi Morimoto-san, On Tuesday, 7 August 2018 11:18:11 EEST Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > Hi Eugeniu, again > > > Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. > > But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT > > (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the > > legs") > > Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, > > "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, > > both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. > > Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem > > for me (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. > > > > This means "matched to more generic compatible") > > "renesas,ulcb" is very generic naming. > Not only h3/m3, if we had v3/e3/d3 etc ulcb, Furthermore, "ulcb" is an unofficial term, the boards are named "starter kit" (SK). Using internal names in code or device tree sources is a normal practice and is fine with me, but I'm a bit bothered by the fact that the H3/M3 boards are called ULCB in DT, while the V3 board are called SK. I wonder if we should unify that or if it's too late. > and if we had such compatible driver/soc, it needs to match to all ulcb. > In reality, maybe we don't create such compatible driver, though. > But, I don't know, I can follow to maintainer opinion.
Hi Laurent, On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 10:21 AM Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, 7 August 2018 11:18:11 EEST Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > > Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. > > > But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT > > > (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the > > > legs") > > > Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, > > > "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, > > > both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. > > > Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem > > > for me (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. > > > > > > This means "matched to more generic compatible") > > > > "renesas,ulcb" is very generic naming. > > Not only h3/m3, if we had v3/e3/d3 etc ulcb, > > Furthermore, "ulcb" is an unofficial term, the boards are named "starter kit" > (SK). Using internal names in code or device tree sources is a normal practice > and is fine with me, but I'm a bit bothered by the fact that the H3/M3 boards > are called ULCB in DT, while the V3 board are called SK. I wonder if we should > unify that or if it's too late. Perhaps we should. Renesas has a long history of boards named <foo>SK or RSK<foo>. The inconsistency started when suddenly SK was spelled out in full, with "Premier" or "Pro" added to differentiate, and the need arose for a shorter nickname, which became "ULCB".... > > and if we had such compatible driver/soc, it needs to match to all ulcb. > > In reality, maybe we don't create such compatible driver, though. > > But, I don't know, I can follow to maintainer opinion. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 01:11:02AM +0200, Eugeniu Rosca wrote: > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > index d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: > compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" > - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) > H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) FWIW/FTR, I have found the schematics of RTP0RC7795SKB00010S (looks like a H3-ES1x Starter-Kit) and this specific board doesn't have an entry in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt. Also, there is RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA03 (8GB version H3-ES20 Starter-Kit). This is also not documented. Interestingly, there is one digit difference between: - 4GiB H3-ES2.0 Starter-Kit: RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 - 8GiB H3-ES2.0 Starter-Kit: RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA03 which means Renesas encodes the amount of RAM in the board id/string. > - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" > - Henninger > compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" > - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: > - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) > compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" > - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) > - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" > - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) > compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" > - Porter (M2-LCDP) > -- > 2.18.0 Best regards, Eugeniu.
Hello Geert, Laurent, Morimoto-san, On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 10:30:14AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 10:21 AM Laurent Pinchart > <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> wrote: > > On Tuesday, 7 August 2018 11:18:11 EEST Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > > > Yeah, it is true "so far". I think there is no problem on current kernel. > > > > But, unfortunately we need to keep compatibility for old/new DT > > > > (= actually, I don't like this DT rule. It is 100% "shackles for the > > > > legs") > > > > Thus, my big concern is that, in the future, > > > > "if" we added "renesas,ulcb" compatible driver/soc, > > > > both h3/m3 ulcb will use it. > > > > Then, if "h3" can work/boot by using same "m3" settings, it is no problem > > > > for me (= "works but limited" is also OK, of course. > > > > > > > > This means "matched to more generic compatible") > > > > > > "renesas,ulcb" is very generic naming. > > > Not only h3/m3, if we had v3/e3/d3 etc ulcb, > > > > Furthermore, "ulcb" is an unofficial term, the boards are named "starter kit" > > (SK). Using internal names in code or device tree sources is a normal practice > > and is fine with me, but I'm a bit bothered by the fact that the H3/M3 boards > > are called ULCB in DT, while the V3 board are called SK. I wonder if we should > > unify that or if it's too late. > > Perhaps we should. > > Renesas has a long history of boards named <foo>SK or RSK<foo>. > The inconsistency started when suddenly SK was spelled out in full, with > "Premier" or "Pro" added to differentiate, and the need arose for a shorter > nickname, which became "ULCB".... I really appreciate your comments, but it looks like at least the following open questions prevent this series to advance into v2 (feel free to point out flaws in my understanding): - [A] it is not clear if H3ULCB, M3ULCB and M3NULCB boards should use a common compatible string or dedicated ones. - [B] In case a common string is used for all *ULCB boards, should it drop the unofficial "ulcb" (Ultra Low Cost Board, thanks Laurent) in exchange to "sk", "starter-kit" or similar? - [C] Same as [A] and [B], but applied to ULCB DTS filenames, which are currently formed based on the same "ulcb" stem. IMHO these questions go somewhat beyond the scope of M3-N ULCB bring-up. In spite of this, I would be happy to implement your proposals. I am also fine to wait a couple more days to collect more feedback, as well as let the ideas/thoughts to settle. However, if you expect the latter to take longer, maybe we can find some "acceptable" solution and defer the naming issues to a later point? Thanks, Eugeniu.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt index d8cf740132c6..f391dba10574 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Boards: compatible = "renesas,gose", "renesas,r8a7793" - H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC7795SKBX0010SA00 (H3 ES1.1)) H3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Premier, RTP0RC77951SKBX010SA00 (H3 ES2.0)) - compatible = "renesas,h3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7795" - Henninger compatible = "renesas,henninger", "renesas,r8a7791" - iWave Systems RZ/G1C Single Board Computer (iW-RainboW-G23S) @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Boards: - Lager (RTP0RC7790SEB00010S) compatible = "renesas,lager", "renesas,r8a7790" - M3ULCB (R-Car Starter Kit Pro, RTP0RC7796SKBX0010SA09 (M3 ES1.0)) - compatible = "renesas,m3ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" + compatible = "renesas,ulcb", "renesas,r8a7796" - Marzen (R0P7779A00010S) compatible = "renesas,marzen", "renesas,r8a7779" - Porter (M2-LCDP)
In the context of M3N-ULCB (RTP0RC77965SKBX010SA00) board bring-up, it's rather pointless to add a new "renesas,m3nulcb" compatible string. Any SoC-level differences between the two variants of ULCB (M3 and M3-N) should be successfully covered by making use of existing "renesas,r8a7796" and "renesas,r8a77965" compatibles. Prior to adding M3-N Starter Kit to the list, rename: - "renesas,h3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" - "renesas,m3ulcb" => "renesas,ulcb" Relevant DTS changes come in separate per-DTS commits. Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@de.adit-jv.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)