31.05.2021 12:14, Thierry Reding пишет: > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 11:25:54PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> The reg property is now specified for the emc-tables nodes in the Tegra20 >> device-tree binding. Add reg property to the EMC table device-tree nodes >> of Tegra20 board device-trees in order to silence dt_binding_check warning >> about the missing property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-acer-a500-picasso.dts | 4 ++++ >> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-paz00.dts | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+) > > In retrospect we should've just used "reg" in the first place rather > than adding the custom "nvidia,ram-code". It's a bit redundant to have > both of them with the same value. I wonder if we should deprecate the > use of "nvidia,ram-code" and at least make the code look at the "reg" > property first and only fall back to "nvidia,ram-code" if "reg" does > not exist. We probably won't ever be able to get rid of the fallback > for backwards-compatibility reasons, but at least that would make the > intent a bit clearer. This may be not doable. We have Asus TF101 which doesn't use RAM code for the memory identification, instead it uses LPDDR chip info [1]. I will send the LPDDR patches later on. [1] https://github.com/grate-driver/linux/blob/master/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-asus-tf101.dts#L1115 The TF101 support mostly in a completed state now, we still need to try to figure out why upstream kernel doesn't work using a stock Android bootloader, so far bootloader replacement to u-boot is required.
