On 07/11/2023 12:09, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 11/6/23 18:07, Conor Dooley wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 12:53:40PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: >>> MicroBlaze V is new AMD/Xilinx soft-core 32bit RISC-V processor IP. >>> It is hardware compatible with classic MicroBlaze processor. Processor can >>> be used with standard AMD/Xilinx IPs including interrupt controller and >>> timer. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> .../devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml | 26 +++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Bindings for SoCs (and by extension boards with them) usually go to in >> $arch/$vendor.yaml not into soc/$vendor/$vendor.yaml. Why is this any >> different? > > I actually found it based on tracking renesas.yaml which describes one of risc-v > board. No problem to move it under bindings/riscv/ > >> >>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..21adf28756fa >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml >>> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) >>> +%YAML 1.2 >>> +--- >>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/soc/amd/amd.yaml# >>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# >>> + >>> +title: AMD Platforms >>> + >>> +maintainers: >>> + - Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxx> >>> + >>> +description: | >>> + AMD boards with MicroBlaze V SOC >>> + >>> +properties: >>> + $nodename: >>> + const: '/' >>> + compatible: >>> + oneOf: >>> + - description: AMD MicroBlaze V >>> + items: >>> + - const: amd,mbv >> >> You don't actually list any boards here, but instead permit having only >> the SoC compatible and no board one. The SoC compatible is also >> incredibly generic. Personally I don't think this binding makes any >> sense as it appears to exist as a catch all for anything using your >> new cores in any combination. > > I think I need to define any string for compatibility because it is standard > property. Because this is soft core it can be added to any board with AMD/Xilinx > chip. I don't have really an option to list all boards. Why? Either there is a product with this soft-core or there is not. It cannot be both. > > I am happy to change it to something else but not sure to what. Alone this compatible does not bring you anything. Best regards, Krzysztof
