On 18:58-20231207, Anwar, Md Danish wrote:
[...]
> >> +
> >> memory@80000000 {
> >> bootph-all;
> >> device_type = "memory";
> >> @@ -229,6 +234,70 @@ transceiver2: can-phy1 {
> >> max-bitrate = <5000000>;
> >> standby-gpios = <&exp1 9 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> >> };
> >> +
> >> + icssg1_eth: icssg1-eth {
> >> + compatible = "ti,am642-icssg-prueth";
> >> + pinctrl-names = "default";
> >> + pinctrl-0 = <&icssg1_rgmii1_pins_default>;
> >> +
> >> + sram = <&oc_sram>;
> >> + ti,prus = <&pru1_0>, <&rtu1_0>, <&tx_pru1_0>, <&pru1_1>, <&rtu1_1>, <&tx_pru1_1>;
> >> + firmware-name = "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-pru0-prueth-fw.elf",
> >> + "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-rtu0-prueth-fw.elf",
> >> + "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-txpru0-prueth-fw.elf",
> >> + "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-pru1-prueth-fw.elf",
> >> + "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-rtu1-prueth-fw.elf",
> >> + "ti-pruss/am65x-sr2-txpru1-prueth-fw.elf";
> >
> > Umm... am65x??? is that a typo? I'd rather keep it am64x here and drop
> > that sr2 thing. Tomorrow there will be a custom bug on am64 and then we
> > will have to respin this again.
> >
>
> No Nishant, this is not a typo. Both AM64x and AM65x use the same ICSSG
> firmwares. We only have am65x-sr2-* firmwares and they are used by both
> AM64x and AM65x and that is why I have kept the firmware-name here in dt
> same as the files that we load on the pru cores.
>
SoCs are different. The hardware as a result is different as well. In
fact, you do have a different compatible to distinguish the two. Some
day, there will be an erratum that is different and we will be stuck
with abi breakage across distros. So, unless you can explain why this
scenario will never occur, I don't buy the argument this will survive
long term.
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3 1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D
