Hi Bjorn,
Thanks for the review. I'll incorporate the changes if we decide to
that this DT should live upstream.
On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 01:26, Bjorn Andersson
<bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue 19 May 03:22 PDT 2020, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>
> > Hi Robert,
> >
> > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 10:21:29AM +0200, Robert Foss wrote:
> > > Add device treee support for the Qualcomm APQ8016 SBC, otherwise known as
> > > the Dragonboard 410c with the D3Camera mezzanine expansion board.
> > >
> > > The D3Camera mezzanine ships in a kit with a OmniVision 5640 sensor module,
> > > which is what this DT targets.
> > >
> >
> > What is the motivation behind adding this new dts? We have been using the
> > userspace tool [1] for applying this as an overlay for some time. But if we
> > start adding dts for mezzanines then for sure we'll end up with some good
> > numbers which will flood arch/{..}/qcom directory.
> >
> > I could understand that one of the motivation is to provide nice user experience
> > to users but that's also taken care by the dt-update tool IMO.
> >
>
> The motivation for posting this was to provoke a response like yours.
>
> I knew about [1], but not that it included the overlays. I'm okay with
> using overlays and the dt-update tool. But I would have preferred that
> the dts files didn't live out of tree, given that this approach breaks
> if I change the name of a node you depend on upstream.
I wasn't aware of the dt-update tool, and it seems pretty neat.
However, a thought I had is that using it to enable a dt-node or a
board variant is not very different from applying a patch the the
upstream tree. The work it takes to do it is about the same, and the
maintenance burden of using a patch is about the same as using
dt-tool.
> > [1] https://github.com/96boards/dt-update
