On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Moritz Fischer <mdf@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Russell, > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 05:09:17PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 09:46:26AM -0700, Moritz Fischer wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > as discussed in Prague last week, here's my follow up. >> > A bit of background again as refresher: Some time ago I submitted a >> > patchset adding dts for some of upcoming boards ([1]). >> > Arguments brought up against merging it were that we have too many Zynq >> > based boards already in tree. First I've seen this. Are the revX versions long lived? I could see some pushback on having multiple revisions, but adding the board itself seems silly. >> > During the Devicetree Workshop we had a brief discussion and most people >> > in the room seemed to be ok with adding the boards, someone suggested >> > (Arnd?) to add vendor subdirectories like in arm64, i.e. something >> > like: >> > >> > arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx/ni/<board> >> > >> > where Xilinx would be the SoC vendor and NI the integrator. >> >> I utterly hate deep levels of directories, but I think the ARM64 >> solution where we /generally/ have one level of additional >> directories under dts is a good compromise. With 1640 files in >> arch/arm/boot/dts, it does need splitting up. Agreed. >> I'm not sure that splitting it by "integrator" is a good idea >> for a single level of directory - using the SoC, SoC group, or >> SoC manufacturer is better. It needs to be a balance between >> number of subdirectories and number of files in the subdirectory, >> so using guidance and not setting it as a hard and fast rule >> makes sense too. What is right for one SoC group may not be >> right for another group of SoCs. > > Ok so in our case that would be: > > arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-*.dts -> arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx Yes. I would like the rule to be "use the SoC vendor prefix". Unfortunately, we haven't quite followed that for arm64 with things like exynos and freescale. > or: > > arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-*.dts -> arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq No. >> >> What I think we should avoid is having to needlessly descend into >> all of the subdirectories, so it needs to be based around the >> Kconfig symbols we're already using. > > So as example only add the arch/arm/boot/dts/xilinx subdirectory based on > CONFIG_ARCH_ZYNQ? No. Look at arch/arm64/boot/dts/Makefile and you will see why that doesn't work. If this can be entirely scripted, I would suggest writing the script and we provide the script to Linus to run just before an -rc1 (or arm-soc folks can run it as long as all dts changes go thru their tree). Also, pay attention that we don't break the devicetree-rebasing.git tree. Rob -- 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
