Re: [PATCH 4/5] dt-bindings: mtd: describe BCM963XX ImageTag format and usage

[Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 10 September 2018 at 11:02, Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 4 September 2018 at 02:30, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 01:19:43PM +0200, Jonas Gorski wrote:
>>> Describe how to use the BCM963XX ImageTag format in a mixed flash layout
>>> environment.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  .../mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt      | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 78 insertions(+)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..f4a444d69d9a
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/partitions/brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
>>> +Broadcom BCM963XX ImageTag Partition Container
>>> +==============================================
>>> +
>>> +Some Broadcom BCM63XX SoC based devices contain additional, non discoverable
>>> +partitions or non standard bootloader partition sizes. For these a mixed layout
>>> +needs to be used with an explicit firmware partition.
>>> +
>>> +The BCM963XX ImageTag is a simple firmware header describing the offsets and
>>> +sizes of the rootfs and kernel parts contained in the firmware.
>>> +
>>> +Required properties:
>>> +- compatible : must be "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag"
>>> +
>>> +Examples:
>>> +
>>> +flash@1e000000 {
>>> +     compatible = "cfi-flash";
>>> +     reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>;
>>> +     bank-width = <2>;
>>> +
>>> +     partitions {
>>> +             compatible = "fixed-partitions";
>>> +             #address-cells = <1>;
>>> +             #size-cells = <1>;
>>> +
>>> +             cfe@0 {
>>> +                     reg = <0x0 0x10000>;
>>> +                     read-only;
>>> +             };
>>> +
>>> +             firmware@10000 {
>>> +                     reg = <0x10000 0x7d0000>;
>>> +                     compatible = "brcm,bcm963xx-imagetag";
>>> +             };
>>> +
>>> +             caldata@7e0000 {
>>> +                     reg = <0x7e0000 0x10000>;
>>> +                     read-only;
>>> +             };
>>> +
>>> +             nvram@7f0000 {
>>> +                     reg = <0x7f0000 0x10000>;
>>> +             };
>>> +     };
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +flash@1e000000 {
>>> +     compatible = "cfi-flash";
>>> +     reg = <0x1e000000 0x2000000>;
>>> +     bank-width = <2>;
>>> +
>>> +     partitions {
>>> +             compatible = "fixed-partitions";
>>> +             #address-cells = <1>;
>>> +             #size-cells = <1>;
>>> +
>>> +             /*
>>> +              * Some devices use a flash chip with 64k erase blocks, some
>>> +              * use one with 128k erase blocks, so the vendor decided to
>>> +              * always use 128k as the firmware offset.
>>> +              */
>>
>> That's a interesting piece of info, but not really a reason to have a
>> second example.
>
> Generally, I'd rather have one example too many than one too few, but
> I can drop it if you think it's unnecessary. If I do that, can I add
> your Ack then here as well for the v2?

Of course a reviewed-by, not an Ack.


Jonas

______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/