On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 04:21:58PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/01/2025 19:31, J. Neuschäfer via B4 Relay wrote: > > From: "J. Neuschäfer" <j.ne@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The MPC8314E is a variant of the MPC8315E without SATA controllers. > > > > Signed-off-by: J. Neuschäfer <j.ne@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8314e.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8314e.dtsi b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8314e.dtsi > > new file mode 100644 > > index 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000..65a96a485dded5d4918d96b38778399d2f348190 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8314e.dtsi > > @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > > +// Copyright 2024 J. Neuschäfer > > +#include "mpc8315e.dtsi" > > + > > +/* MPC8314E does not support SATA */ > > +/delete-node/ &sata0; > > +/delete-node/ &sata1; > > > You should not delete nodes. That's not really maintainable code. Either > this is in base DTSI or it does not. If it does exist, then this delete > is incorrect. > > If it does not delete, you are not supposed to include other SoC/device > which is not the subset of this one, so your includes are not correct. With that in mind, I think it makes sense to structure these (up to) four devices the other way around: - MPC8314 as the base, because it has the least features - MPC8314E, MPC8315E, and the currently unused MPC8315 based on MPC8314 I'll do that. Best regards, J. Neuschäfer
