On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 02:48:41PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This all looks good. I just have a couple of comments about the cpus node.
>
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 01:10:57AM +0000, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > This patch adds basic device tree definitions for Samsung S3C64xx SoCs.
> >
> > Since all the SoCs in the series are very similar, the files are created
> > hierarchically - one file for the whole series and then separate files
> > for particular SoCs including the common one.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> [...]
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c64xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c64xx.dtsi
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..55d6e08
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/s3c64xx.dtsi
> > @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Samsung's S3C64xx SoC series common device tree source
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (c) 2013 Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > + *
> > + * Samsung's S3C64xx SoC series device nodes are listed in this file.
> > + * Particular SoCs from S3C64xx series can include this file and provide
> > + * values for SoCs specfic bindings.
> > + *
> > + * Note: This file does not include device nodes for all the controllers in
> > + * S3C64xx SoCs. As device tree coverage for S3C64xx increases, additional
> > + * nodes can be added to this file.
> > + *
> > + * 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.
> > + */
> > +
> > +/include/ "skeleton.dtsi"
> > +
> > +/ {
> > + cpus {
> > + cpu@0 {
> > + compatible = "arm,arm1176jzf-s";
> > + };
> > + };
>
> You can drop the unit address from the cpu node - it's meant to be there to
> differentiate multiple nodes (and is supposed to match the reg property, which
> the 1176jzf-s can't have, as it doesn't have an MPIDR).
Well, this is a point that I should consider since the kernel docs I wrote are
misleading, they require the reg property that can not be there on UP.
True, MPIDR does not exist in this case, but I have to document this in the
bindings since it is unclear.
>
> Also, "arm,arm1176jzf-s" isn't listed in the binding doc. There was a question
> about how to maintain this list [1], but I can't seem to find a conclusion, if
> any were reached. It might be worth appending "arm,arm1176" to the compatible
> list for the cpu node in case we want to enable something via dt for all 1176
> variations.
>
> Dave, Lorenzo, any thoughts?
Eh, frankly I do not know how to handle this. Either we add a compatible
string to the bindings anytime a DT gets merged in the kernel but how
to maintain it, it has to be defined. Happy to hear some feedback on
this.
Lorenzo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
