Hi Rob,
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 7:41 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 12:17:08PM +0100, Lad Prabhakar wrote:
> > renesas.yaml lists out all the Renesas SoC's and the platforms/EVK's which
> > is either ARM32/ARM64. It would rather make sense if we move renesas.yaml
> > to the soc/renesas folder instead. This is in preparation for adding a new
> > SoC (RZ/Five) from Renesas which is based on RISC-V.
>
> Please post this as part of the above.
>
> bindings/soc/ is just a dumping ground for stuff that doesn't fit
> anywhere. We've mostly cleaned bindings/arm/ of that, so I don't really
Note that the target of this move is not .../bindings/soc/, but
.../bindings/soc/renesas/, so it's a bit less of a dumping ground.
Perhaps this is also a good opportunity to split renesas.yaml per
family or product group
(renesas,{rmobile,rcar-gen[1234],rza,rzg,rzn,...}.yaml?
A fine-grained split may cause headaches with RZ/G2UL and RZ/Five
sharing the same SoC Base, but a coarse-grained split keeping all RZ/G
(after all RZ/Five is part of RZ/G) or even all RZ series together should work.
> want to start that again. I would propose bindings/board/ instead if we
> move in this direction.
.../bindings/board has the issue with the same boards used with
multiple pin-compatible SoCs, SiPs, and SoMs.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
