Hi Andreas,
> Am 04.10.2023 um 08:53 schrieb Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Drop omap36xx compatible as done in other omap3630 devices.
> This has apparently fallen through the lattice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-gta04.dtsi | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-gta04.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> index b6b27e93857f..3661340009e7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-gta04.dtsi
> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
>
> / {
> model = "OMAP3 GTA04";
> - compatible = "goldelico,gta04", "ti,omap3630", "ti,omap36xx", "ti,omap3";
there seem to be some more references to ti,omap36xx:
arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap3-lilly-a83x.dtsi: compatible = "incostartec,omap3-lilly-a83x", "ti,omap3630", "ti,omap36xx", "ti,omap3";
arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-generic.c: "ti,omap36xx",
drivers/clk/ti/dpll.c: of_machine_is_compatible("ti,omap36xx")) &&
drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c: { .compatible = "ti,omap36xx", .data = &omap36xx_soc_data, },
So are you sure that we can remove it without replacement or code fixes in dpll and cpufreq (board-generic is probably no issue)?
Especially. in ti-cpufreq. the compatible "ti,omap3630" is tagged as "legacy".
So shouldn't "ti,omap3630" be dropped?
So maybe the other devices where it has been dropped are now broken...
> + compatible = "goldelico,gta04", "ti,omap3630", "ti,omap3";
> cpus {
> cpu@0 {
> cpu0-supply = <&vcc>;
> --
> 2.39.2
>
BR,
Nikolaus
