Hi Krzysztof, On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 10:31 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/07/2022 11:00, Lad, Prabhakar wrote: > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 9:53 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 26/07/2022 20:06, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > >>> Ignore the ARM renesas.yaml schema if the board is RZ/Five SMARC EVK > >>> (RISC-V arch). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml | 9 +++++++++ > >>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml > >>> index ff80152f092f..f646df1a23af 100644 > >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml > >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/renesas.yaml > >>> @@ -9,6 +9,15 @@ title: Renesas SH-Mobile, R-Mobile, and R-Car Platform Device Tree Bindings > >>> maintainers: > >>> - Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> +# We want to ignore this schema if the board is of RISC-V arch > >>> +select: > >>> + not: > >>> + properties: > >>> + compatible: > >>> + contains: > >>> + items: > >>> + - const: renesas,r9a07g043f01 > >> > >> Second issue - why not renesas,r9a07g043? > >> > > We have two R9A07G043 SOC'S one is based on ARM64 and other on RISC-V. > > > > RZ/G2UL ARM64: > > Type-1 Part Number: R9A07G043U11GBG#BC0 > > Type-2 Part Number: R9A07G043U12GBG#BC0 > > > > RZ/Five RISCV: > > 13 x 13 mm Package Part Number: R9A07G043F01GBG#BC0 > > > > So to differentiate in ARM schema I am using renesas,r9a07g043f01. > > What is the point to keep then r9a07g043 fallback? The two SoCs are not > compatible at all, so they must not use the same fallback. > Agreed, I wanted to keep it consistent with what was done with ARM64 (since both the SoCs shared R9A07G043 part number). Geert - What are your thoughts on the above? Cheers, Prabhakar
