Am 02.03.2016 um 01:03 schrieb André Przywara: > On 01/03/16 23:31, Andreas Färber wrote: >> Am 01.03.2016 um 13:43 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>> On 01/03/16 11:18, Andreas Färber wrote: >>>> Am 01.03.2016 um 12:01 schrieb Andre Przywara: >>>>> On 29/02/16 23:44, Andreas Färber wrote: >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb.dtsi >>>>>> index 0ae089bd1806..5088ae3ff653 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb.dtsi >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic/meson-gxbb.dtsi >>>>>> @@ -117,7 +117,9 @@ >>>>>> gic: interrupt-controller@c4301000 { >>>>>> compatible = "arm,cortex-a15-gic", "arm,cortex-a9-gic"; >>>>> >>>>> I think "arm,gic-400" is the name to use here these days, especially for >>>>> arm64. >>>> >>>> I took what /proc/device-tree showed on Android and verified that this >>>> compatible is in use in mainline. >>> >>> Some vendor Android kernel is not a good reference for mainline work ;-) >>> Better look at other DTs in arch/arm64/boot/dts. >> >> Yes, that's what "in use in mainline" refers to: >> >> $ git grep "cortex-a15-gic" -- arch/arm64/boot/dts/ | grep -v gic-400 >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-shadowcat.dtsi: compatible = >> "arm,cortex-a15-gic"; >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-storm.dtsi: compatible = "arm,cortex-a15-gic"; >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/foundation-v8.dts: compatible = >> "arm,cortex-a15-gic", "arm,cortex-a9-gic"; >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/arm/rtsm_ve-aemv8a.dts: compatible = >> "arm,cortex-a15-gic", "arm,cortex-a9-gic"; >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra132.dtsi: compatible = "arm,cortex-a15-gic"; > > Which is mainly because those DTs predate the introduction of > "arm,gic-400". Other DTs kept the cortex strings in additionally to stay > compatible with older kernels. Sure, but shouldn't we update them to have arm,gic-400 first then? >>> You could keep "arm,cortex-a15-gic" in there if you care about >>> compatibility with older (vendor) kernels, but I guess there are other >>> issues which prevent this anyway, so you could drop this as well. >> >> Yeah, I don't care about backwards compatibility with downstream >> kernels, they use weird compatible strings with spaces anyway. > > So please drop it and use only "arm,gic-400" to be in line with all the > other more recent SoCs. Already done, still inserting cbus/aobus nodes and moving uart nodes, then need to re-test. Cheers, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- 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