Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: Add SolidRun LX2162A SoM & Clearfog Board

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



HI Krzysztof,

Am 16.06.23 um 14:36 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
On 16/06/2023 13:06, Josua Mayer wrote:
Add DT compatible for SolidRun LX2162A SoM and Clearfog board.

Signed-off-by: Josua Mayer <josua@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 2 ++
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
index 15d411084065..438a4ece8157 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
@@ -1373,9 +1373,11 @@ properties:
        - description: SolidRun LX2160A based Boards
          items:
            - enum:
+              - solidrun,clearfog
                - solidrun,clearfog-cx
                - solidrun,honeycomb
            - const: solidrun,lx2160a-cex7
+          - const: solidrun,lx2162a-som
            - const: fsl,lx2160a
You change existing entries, breaking boards and changing the meaning,
without any explanation in commit msg. That's not how it is done. Please
provide rationale in commit msg.

I'm sorry. Given your comment I think I did not understand how these entries are supposed to work.
So perhaps you can provide some guidance based on my explanation?:

- NXP LX2162 is a smaller physical package of the same LX2160 SoC, with reduced IOs and some silicon blocks disabled.
- SolidRun LX2162 SoM is essentially a different form factor of LX2160 CEX
- SolidRun LX2162 Clearfog is the reference platform for the SoM. Despite it's naming similarity to clearfog-cx, it has a different feature set more similar to SolidRun Armada 388 Clearfog Pro

So I believed I could just add to the existing entry "SolidRun LX2160A based Boards" also the new LX2162 Board & SoM. I see now that adding a fourth const messes upthe existing 3-part compatible for those already existing boards.

Please can you confirm if it would have been more correct to replace "const: solidrun,lx2160a-cex7" with an enum?:
enum:
  - solidrun,lx2160a-cex7
  - solidrun,lx2162a-som

Finally, is it okay to add a "solidrun,clearfog" given my explanation above, or should it be more specific "solidrun,lx2162a-clearfog"?

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Sincerely
Josua Mayer



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux