On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 05:08:22PM +0530, Pratyush Brahma wrote: > > On 11/20/2024 5:24 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 01:41:03AM +0530, Kuldeep Singh wrote: > > > > > > On 11/19/2024 2:55 PM, Pratyush Brahma wrote: > > > > This patch series is based on Tengfei Fan's patches [1] which adds support > > > > for QCS9100 Ride and QCS9100 Ride Rev3 boards. > > > > > > > > Some new carveouts (viz. gunyah_md and a few pil dtb carveouts) have been > > > > introduced and the size and base addresses have been updated for > > > > a few of existing carveouts compared to SA8775P. Also, tz_ffi_mem carveout > > > > and its corresponding scm reference has been removed as it is not required > > > > for these boards. Incorporate these changes in the updated memory map > > > > for QCS9100 Ride and QCS9100 Rev3 boards. > > > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240911-add_qcs9100_support-v2-4-e43a71ceb017@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Pratyush Brahma <quic_pbrahma@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > The memory map for qcs9100-ride-r3 and qcs9100-ride is exactly same. > > > A good churn you are first deleting(based on sa8775p) and then re-adding > > > for qcs9100-ride*. > > > > > > I think it's better to move common qcs9100-ride* to a common file ex: > > > qcs9100-ride.dtsi and keep specifics further to .dts files? > > > > > > This will ensure common entities are present at same place with no > > > duplicates. > > I'd second this proposal. > Ok then, I see that there are some thermal and gpu enablement changes as > well in the pipeline to be posted. What kind of changes? It's really hard to make a judgement if you don't describe what is happening. > Having a common dtsi file for these iot socs would help in reducing the > duplication at board > dts file level for all these changes. In that regard, does naming it > "sa8775-iot.dtsi" sound good? The board files can include this dtsi. qcs9100.dtsi? -- With best wishes Dmitry
