Hello Christopher,
On 2024-07-17 18:46, Christopher Obbard wrote:
This adds support for the PX30-based Core-PX30-JD4 system-on-module
from
Firefly and includes support for the SoM in combination with the
Firefly MB-JD4-PX30 baseboard.
---
Changes in v2:
- Split into two separate files: dtsi for the SoM and dts for the
carrier.
- Change devicetree compatible to match SoM/carrier split.
- Change device names to better match vendor's name.
- Properly model baseboard & SoM regulators.
- Properly model baseboard recovery key.
- Remove DSI panel (& related nodes) since "sitronix,st7703" compatible
is undocumented & hardware is unavailable.
- Remove unused audio-related nodes.
- Remove unused UART nodes.
- Remove unused PMIC pinctrl nodes.
- Add node for baseboard LEDs.
- Link to v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240716-rockchip-px30-firefly-v1-0-60cdad3023a3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks for the v2.
---
Christopher Obbard (3):
dt-bindings: arm: rockchip: Add Firefly Core-PX30-JD4 with
baseboard
arm64: dts: rockchip: add Firefly Core-PX30-JD4 SoM
arm64: dts: rockchip: add Firefly JD4 baseboard with
Core-PX30-JD4 SoM
.../devicetree/bindings/arm/rockchip.yaml | 6 +
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/Makefile | 1 +
.../boot/dts/rockchip/px30-firefly-jd4-core.dtsi | 322
+++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/px30-firefly-jd4.dts | 178 ++++++++++++
4 files changed, 507 insertions(+)
It would be better to name the new dts(i) files like this:
- px30-firefly-jd4-core.dtsi
- px30-firefly-jd4-core-mb.dts
This would follow the <SoC>-<brand>-<SoM>-<carrier>.dts pattern, which
is somewhat common and sorts nicely in directory listings when there's
more than one carrier board for the same SoM.
---
base-commit: 51835949dda3783d4639cfa74ce13a3c9829de00
change-id: 20240716-rockchip-px30-firefly-59efc93d6784
Best regards,
