Hi Rob, On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 7:41 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 12:17:08PM +0100, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > > renesas.yaml lists out all the Renesas SoC's and the platforms/EVK's which > > is either ARM32/ARM64. It would rather make sense if we move renesas.yaml > > to the soc/renesas folder instead. This is in preparation for adding a new > > SoC (RZ/Five) from Renesas which is based on RISC-V. > > Please post this as part of the above. > > bindings/soc/ is just a dumping ground for stuff that doesn't fit > anywhere. We've mostly cleaned bindings/arm/ of that, so I don't really Note that the target of this move is not .../bindings/soc/, but .../bindings/soc/renesas/, so it's a bit less of a dumping ground. Perhaps this is also a good opportunity to split renesas.yaml per family or product group (renesas,{rmobile,rcar-gen[1234],rza,rzg,rzn,...}.yaml? A fine-grained split may cause headaches with RZ/G2UL and RZ/Five sharing the same SoC Base, but a coarse-grained split keeping all RZ/G (after all RZ/Five is part of RZ/G) or even all RZ series together should work. > want to start that again. I would propose bindings/board/ instead if we > move in this direction. .../bindings/board has the issue with the same boards used with multiple pin-compatible SoCs, SiPs, and SoMs. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds