On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 03:20:11PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >> Also, I have a general comments, and it really depends on what your > >> intention about the board ecosystem is. Do you expect the SOM to be > >> swappable in multiple boards, or do you expect to send it as something > >> that is just fixed into a daughter board? > >> > >> In the former case, you probably want to use overlays instead. In the > >> latter, you're fine. > >> > > Right, we expect the SoM to be swappable. I agree, to use overlays is > > more convenient, but > > the devboard DT file will be a reference for the overlays and the future > > boards based on Neutis. > > What about just keeping the common nodes enabled in a SoM .dts, so that > the average board doesn't need an Overlay for booting? I guess the fundamental difference would be if the SoM can be run free-standing or not. If it is, then overlays would be best. If not, then I'm fine with using the include like Aleksandr has used. > @Maxime/Rob, is it possible to merge .dtso files these days? If not, > could that be considered in the big dts Makefile refactoring? :) I don't really know what is that big dts Makefile refactoring you're mentionning, but I don't think we can merge dtso before having the DT connectors in place. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
