On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 12:53 PM, Scott Branden <scott.branden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Rob, > > Could you please kindly comment on change below. > > It allows board variants to be added easily via a simple define for > different number of SATA ports. > > > > On 18-06-04 09:22 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> >> On 05/18/2018 11:34 AM, Scott Branden wrote: >>> >>> Move remaining sata configuration to stingray-sata.dtsi and enable >>> ports based on NUM_SATA defined. >>> Now, all that needs to be done is define NUM_SATA per board. >> >> Rob could you review this and let us know if this approach is okay or >> not? Thank you! >> >>> Signed-off-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/stingray/stingray-sata.dtsi >>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/stingray/stingray-sata.dtsi >>> index 8c68e0c..7f6d176 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/stingray/stingray-sata.dtsi >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/stingray/stingray-sata.dtsi >>> @@ -43,7 +43,11 @@ >>> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 321 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; >>> #address-cells = <1>; >>> #size-cells = <0>; >>> +#if (NUM_SATA > 0) >>> + status = "okay"; >>> +#else >>> status = "disabled"; >>> +#endif This only works if ports are contiguously enabled (0-N). You might not care, but it is not a pattern that works in general. And I'm not a fan of C preprocessing in DT files in general beyond just defines for single numbers. 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
