On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 14:20:48, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Kumar, Anil <anilkumar.v@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 23:23:32, Hunter, Jon wrote: > >> > >> On 03/08/2013 08:25 PM, Anil Kumar wrote: > >> > Hi Jon, > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> Adds basic device-tree support for OMAP3430 SDP board which has 256MB > >> >> of RAM and uses the TWL4030 power management IC. > >> > > >> > I think this board support should be in separate patch series with > >> > related patches. > >> > >> Well I wanted to keep them altogether so that I can send a pull request > >> to Benoit and Tony. > > > > Sorry, but can you please tell what makes you to think that you > > can send pull request only when they are altogether ? > > > > Is there any logical dependency with other patches except > > "[PATCH 6/9] ARM: dts: Add OMAP3430 SDP flash memory bindings" is on > > top of this patch ? > > > >> > >> >> > >> >> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@xxxxxx> > >> >> --- > >> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 1 + > >> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3430-sdp.dts | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >> 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+) > >> >> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3430-sdp.dts > >> >> > >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >> >> index 9c62558..89013ed 100644 > >> >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >> >> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS) += omap2420-h4.dtb \ > >> >> omap3-beagle-xm.dtb \ > >> >> omap3-evm.dtb \ > >> >> omap3-tobi.dtb \ > >> >> + omap3430-sdp.dtb \ > >> >> omap4-panda.dtb \ > >> >> omap4-panda-a4.dtb \ > >> >> omap4-panda-es.dtb \ > >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3430-sdp.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3430-sdp.dts > >> >> new file mode 100644 > >> >> index 0000000..be0650d > >> >> --- /dev/null > >> >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3430-sdp.dts > >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ > >> >> +/* > >> >> + * Copyright (C) 2013 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/ > >> >> + * > >> >> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > >> >> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as > >> >> + * published by the Free Software Foundation. > >> >> + */ > >> >> +/dts-v1/; > >> >> + > >> >> +/include/ "omap3.dtsi" > >> >> + > >> >> +/ { > >> >> + model = "TI OMAP3430 SDP"; > >> >> + compatible = "ti,omap3430-sdp", "ti,omap3"; > >> > > >> > I have not seen any related changes in "board-generic.c" for your board. > >> > So just wanted know, how this board is booting ? > >> > >> If you look at board-generic.c you will see that "ti,omap3" will match > >> the OMAP3 generic machine. So you don't need to modify the board-generic.c. > > > > According to this omap3-beagle.dts and omap3-beagle-xm.dts are also > > booting in some way. So it is not clear to me, why there two > > "DT_MACHINE_START" for omap3. I have seen there is only one > > different in "init_time" for the same. > > > > Hi Anil, > > You may take a look to commit: > > 7dd9d50 ARM: OMAP3: Add generic machine descriptor for boards with > OMAP3 GP device > > So, the second DT_MACHINE_START is meant to be used by OMAP3 boards > which use GP devices and this is not the case for "ti,omap3430-sdp" > afaiu. > > I wonder if instead of adding each OMAP3 board with GP devices such as > "ti,omap3-beagle", is not better to have a "ti,omap3-gp" compatible > property. Sound good to me. @Benoit, Is this makes any sense for you? > > The whole point of DT is to decouple the hardware description from the > kernel code so in general we should use the more generic compatible > string ("ti,omap3") unless the hardware has some specifics that have > to be addressed, such as these boards that use GP devices. Thanks you very much. It really help full for me. Thanks, Anil ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�������ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
