Hi Dinh On Thursday 25 February 2016 10:56:28 Dinh Nguyen wrote: > On 02/25/2016 04:38 AM, Steffen Trumtrar wrote: > > Hi Tim! > > > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:05:05AM +0100, Tim Sander wrote: > >> From: Tim Sander <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Add a more specific compatible string:"terasic,de0-nano-soc" for > >> respective board. Background: when checking for bootspec entries, some > >> board specific fixups are not apropriate for board of the same platform > >> ("altr,socfpga-cyclone5"). The same aproach is taken with the > >> EBV-Socrates board. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Tim Sander <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 + > >> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts | 2 +- > >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt > >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt index > >> 72e2c5a..d1f7803 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt > >> @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ synology Synology, Inc. > >> > >> tbs TBS Technologies > >> tcl Toby Churchill Ltd. > >> technologic Technologic Systems > >> > >> +terasic Terasic Inc. > >> > >> thine THine Electronics, Inc. > >> ti Texas Instruments > >> tlm Trusted Logic Mobility > > > > You should IMHO split this up in two patches. > > First patch: add terasic > > That's right. That patch will go through the DTS maintainer's tree. Ah well for such a simple patch it turns out more complicated than thought :-) Will do as soon as there is agreement on a name which does not seem that easy... > > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts > >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts index > >> afea364..704aa9d 100644 > >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts > >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts > >> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ > >> > >> / { > >> > >> model = "Terasic DE-0(Atlas)"; > >> > >> - compatible = "altr,socfpga-cyclone5", "altr,socfpga"; > >> + compatible = "terasic,de0-nano-soc","altr,socfpga-cyclone5", > >> "altr,socfpga"; > So perhaps, "terasic,de0-sockit"? > > > Second patch: this. > > And I can take this one. > > >> chosen { > >> > >> bootargs = "earlyprintk"; > > > > The naming of this board still confuses me though. > > > > It has 3 different names now: > > - de0_sockit.dts > > - Terasic DE-0(Atlas) > > - de0-nano-soc > > > > And according to Terasic DE0-Nano-SoC is the same as Atlas-SoC with a > > different software?! So all three names are actually correct ?! Weird. > > I had a hard time understanding this myself. But from what I gather > from[1], I just name the file de0_sockit. As far as i remember there are different de0 and different sockit boards, so the name does not seem to be as concise? I don't care but i would say that de0-nano-soc is the most concise and easier to search for than atlas which might turn up more false postives? But as long as there is a more selective name than cyclone5 everthing is fine with me. Best regards Tim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html