On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 7:10 AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 7/27/21 10:23 PM, Gerhard Engleder wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 10:18 PM Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> The evaluation platform is based on ZCU104. The difference is not > >>> only the FPGA image. Also a FMC extension card with Ethernet PHYs is > >>> needed. So also the physical hardware is different. > >> > >> Okay, that's enough of a reason for another compatible. You'll have to > >> update the schema. > > > > Ok, I will update Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/xilinx.yaml. > > In past we said that we won't be accepting any FPGA description in > u-boot/linux projects. I don't think anything has changed from that time > and I don't want to end up in situation that we will have a lot of > configurations which none else can try and use. I agree that it does not make sense to add configurations that no one else can try and use. The goal is that others can easily try out the IP. I want to provide the FPGA image to others who are interested. It won't be many of course. > Also based on your description where you use evaluation board with FMC > card it is far from any product and looks like demonstration configuration. You are right, it is not product, which is addressed to end users. It is a demonstration configuration for developers. Isn't that valid for all evaluation boards? As a developer I'm very happy if I can do evaluation and development without any vendor tree. I can do that now with the ZCU104. So a big thank you from me for your work! > You can add the same fragment to dt binding example which should be > enough for everybody to understand how your IP should be described. This dt binding example is already there. So a device tree like this won't be accepted? Gerhard
