On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 11:15:03AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:50 AM Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > For platforms that have multiple boards and hence have multiple EEPROMs > > for identifying the different boards, it is useful to label the EEPROMs > > in device-tree so that they can be easily identified. For example, MAC > > address information is stored in the EEPROM on the processor module for > > some Jetson platforms which is not only required by the kernel but the > > bootloader as well. So having a simple way to identify the EEPROM is > > needed. > > > > Changes since V1: > > - By default initialise the nvmem_config.id as NVMEM_DEVID_AUTO and not > > NVMEM_DEVID_NONE > > - Dropped the 'maxItems' from the dt-binding doc. > > > > Jon Hunter (5): > > misc: eeprom: at24: Initialise AT24 NVMEM ID field > > dt-bindings: eeprom: at24: Add label property for AT24 > > misc: eeprom: at24: Support custom device names for AT24 EEPROMs > > arm64: tegra: Add label properties for EEPROMs > > arm64: tegra: Populate EEPROMs for Jetson Xavier NX > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/eeprom/at24.yaml | 3 +++ > > .../boot/dts/nvidia/tegra186-p2771-0000.dts | 1 + > > .../arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra186-p3310.dtsi | 1 + > > .../arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194-p2888.dtsi | 1 + > > .../boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194-p2972-0000.dts | 1 + > > .../nvidia/tegra194-p3509-0000+p3668-0000.dts | 14 ++++++++++++ > > .../boot/dts/nvidia/tegra194-p3668-0000.dtsi | 16 ++++++++++++++ > > .../arm64/boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210-p2180.dtsi | 1 + > > .../boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210-p2371-2180.dts | 1 + > > .../boot/dts/nvidia/tegra210-p3450-0000.dts | 2 ++ > > drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++- > > 11 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > -- > > 2.25.1 > > > > Just FYI: I'm fine with the at24 part. I can take them through my tree > for v5.10. Who is taking the DTS patches for tegra? Thierry? I can > provide you with an immutable branch if that's fine. I can't just ack > the at24 patches because they conflict with what I already have in my > tree for v5.10. I don't think I'll need an immutable branch since the device tree changes are not dependent on anything in the bindings, except maybe for validation, or the driver. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
