Michal, On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 02:54:48PM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > Hi, > > On 25.9.2017 18:11, Moritz Fischer wrote: > > Hi Michal, > > > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:19:44AM +0200, Michal Simek wrote: > >> Hi Moritz > >> > >> sorry for delay. > > > > No problem. > > > >> > >> On 12.9.2017 01:22, Moritz Fischer wrote: > >>> Add support for the National Instruments Project Sulfur SDR > >>> motherboards Rev 2,3 and 4. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Moritz Fischer <mdf@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 3 + > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev2.dts | 84 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev3.dts | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev4.dts | 26 ++++++ > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur.dtsi | 133 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 5 files changed, 364 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev2.dts > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev3.dts > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur-rev4.dts > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-ni-sulfur.dtsi > >> > >> Is this publicly available board? > > > > Will be in Q1 2018 was announced at GRCon'17 ([1]). > > Some of the Rev3s are currently deployed in Norway as part of a radar > > system. > > > >> I am not quite sure we should apply these dts files. There are a lot of > >> boards with zynq and there must be any strong argument for applying this > >> to the tree. For arm32 with even flat tree structure. > > > > What's the issue with merging them, except for having 3 more files? > > For me this is not a problem because on Linux side it is not increasing > build time. > I want to see the value for community. All xilinx platforms are > evaluation generic purpose boards which are showing how to connect stuff > together. > On the other hand this is real product. Uh. > I would let arm-soc maintainer to decide if this is fine or not. I > definitely don't want to end up in situation that we will have dts for > real products which are not bringing any value for others. Sure, it's the maintainers call. I do intend to have my customers run mainline on it eventually, currently I'm a handful of patches away from making that happen. So yes, running mainline is a usecase that matters to me. It is one thing to keep bitching about vendor kernels as a community continuously, but then if someone goes through the effort and actually tries to run mainline, you give them crap like that above. Our products usually come with full schematics [1], firmware, fpga code and all available, I don't know what makes them less useful to the community as a platform to experiment and develop on than Xilinx eval boards. There's several people that I know of both hobbyists and companies that build systems around these platforms, so I don't know ... - Moritz [1] http://files.ettus.com/schematics/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
