On 10 September 2018 at 11:02, Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4 September 2018 at 02:30, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 01:19:43PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>>> Describe how to use the BCM963XX ImageTag format in a mixed flash layout
>>> environment.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> .../mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..f4a444d69d9a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
>>> +Broadcom BCM963XX ImageTag Partition Container
>>> +==============================================
>>> +
>>> +Some Broadcom BCM63XX SoC based devices contain additional, non discoverable
>>> +partitions or non standard bootloader partition sizes. For these a mixed layout
>>> +needs to be used with an explicit firmware partition.
>>> +
>>> +The BCM963XX ImageTag is a simple firmware header describing the offsets and
>>> +sizes of the rootfs and kernel parts contained in the firmware.
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible : must be "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"
>>> +
>>> +Examples:
>>> +
>>> +flash@1e000000 {
>>> + compatible = "cfi-flash";
>>> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>;
>>> + bank-width = <2>;
>>> +
>>> + partitions {
>>> + compatible = "fixed-partitions";
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>>> +
>>> + cfe@0 {
>>> + reg = <0x0 0x10000>;
>>> + read-only;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + firmware@10000 {
>>> + reg = <0x10000 0x7d0000>;
>>> + compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag";
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + caldata@7e0000 {
>>> + reg = <0x7e0000 0x10000>;
>>> + read-only;
>>> + };
>>> +
>>> + nvram@7f0000 {
>>> + reg = <0x7f0000 0x10000>;
>>> + };
>>> + };
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +flash@1e000000 {
>>> + compatible = "cfi-flash";
>>> + reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>;
>>> + bank-width = <2>;
>>> +
>>> + partitions {
>>> + compatible = "fixed-partitions";
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <1>;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Some devices use a flash chip with 64k erase blocks, some
>>> + * use one with 128k erase blocks, so the vendor decided to
>>> + * always use 128k as the firmware offset.
>>> + */
>>
>> That's a interesting piece of info, but not really a reason to have a
>> second example.
>
> Generally, I'd rather have one example too many than one too few, but
> I can drop it if you think it's unnecessary. If I do that, can I add
> your Ack then here as well for the v2?
Of course a reviewed-by, not an Ack.
Jonas
