On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 9:42 AM Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [...] > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.yaml > >> index b48ea1e4913a..2751dd778ce0 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.yaml > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/amlogic.yaml > >> @@ -150,9 +150,10 @@ properties: > >> - const: amlogic,s922x > >> - const: amlogic,g12b > >> > >> - - description: Boards with the Amlogic Meson SM1 S905X3 SoC > >> + - description: Boards with the Amlogic Meson SM1 S905X3/D3/Y3 SoC > >> items: > >> - enum: > >> - seirobotics,sei610 > >> + - khadas,vim3 > > Khadas asked me to rename the board to "vim3l", which is the commercial name, > should I only change the DT name or also the compatible "khadas,vim3l" ? I vote for being consistent: - rename the .dts to vim3l - and change the compatible string > >> - const: amlogic,sm1 > > on the GXL we differentiate between S905X and S905D > > do we need to differentiate S905X3 from S905D3 (for example)? > > From a pure SoC die perspective they are the same, exactly like > the S905X and S905D, only the package changes. > So only the board DT will determine which eth PHY is used, > if a DSI panel is connected, a demodulator is connected.. even > if the underlying package is S905Y3 without any of these pins > available. OK, I see - fine for me then GXL's S905W and/or S805X are the "special cases" then which (AFAIK) use a different (smaller) package (so it made sense to differentiate all GXL SoCs) Martin
