On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:24:20AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 11/8/23 11:12, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 11/7/23 22:18, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 12:09:58PM +0100, 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/ > > > > > > > > That one is kinda a special case, as it contains arm/arm64/riscv. > > > > > > If they are kinda a special case then what are we? > > > All AMD/Xilinx platforms(ZynqMP/Versal/Versal NET) can have > > > arm/arm64/riscv/microblaze cpus(riscv/microblaze as soft cores) in the same > > > board (IIRC I have also seen xtensa soft core on our chips too). > > > > That would be an argument iff you had all of those in a single file, not > > when you only have a single compatible for a riscv "soc" in it. > > But DT (compare to System DT) is all the time describing system from cpu > point of view. Or are they describing all that 3 different cpus via the same > DT? Please look at the contents of renesas.yaml & the commit that moved it to its current location. I'm only talking about the binding, not any users.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
