Hi Dirk, On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 07:20:30AM +0200, Dirk Behme wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On 21.07.2016 01:51, Simon Horman wrote: > >On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:15:27AM +0200, Dirk Behme wrote: > >>Hi Simon, > > > >... > > > >>Hmm, could you kindly help me to remember what's the recent status of your > >>discussion above regarding a hierarchical structure of the RCar3 device > >>trees? > > > >Hi Dirk, > > > >>From my point of view the most promising avenue at this time is work that > >Geert has been doing to explore making things more flexible by updating the > >DT automatically at run time. He can expand on this but the idea is to add > >per-soc compat strings and otherwise update the DT into a per-SoC version. > >This ought to allow significant portions of the DT to be common between > >SoCs in the same R-Car generation for at lest Gen 2 and Gen 3. > > > There are two topics: > > a) Hierarchical static structure of devices trees and clock definitions for > RCar3 SoCs > b) Detecting of RCar3 SoC type and engineering sample revisions at runtime > > About which topic do you talk here? I think we shouldn't mix them. I was referring to topic a) which I would describe as consolidation of static DT descriptions. However, I believe that the same or a similar approach to DT fixups can also be used for problem b). I agree we should discuss these topics separately. > Best regards > > Dirk > > P.S.: If you like, we could have a chat in #renesas-soc, too :) Sure. In general I am there when I am at my desk and not completely consumed by work at hand.
