lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: timer: sifive,clint: add compatible for OpenC906
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:41:27PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>
>
> 于 2022年11月22日 GMT+08:00 下午3:35:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> 写到:
> >On 22/11/2022 08:18, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> >> 在 2022-11-21星期一的 11:06 +0100,Krzysztof Kozlowski写道:
> >>> On 21/11/2022 05:17, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> >>>> T-Head OpenC906 is a open-source-licensed fixed-configuration of
> >>>> C906,
> >>>> which is now public and able to be integrated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Add a compatible for the CLINT shipped as part of OpenC906, which
> >>>> should
> >>>> just be ordinary C9xx CLINT.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <uwu@icenowy.me>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/sifive,clint.yaml | 1 +
> >>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git
> >>>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/sifive,clint.yaml
> >>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/sifive,clint.yaml
> >>>> index aada6957216c..86703e995e31 100644
> >>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/sifive,clint.yaml
> >>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/sifive,clint.yaml
> >>>> @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ properties:
> >>>>            - const: sifive,clint0
> >>>>        - items:
> >>>>            - enum:
> >>>> +              - thead,openc906-clint
> >>>>                - allwinner,sun20i-d1-clint
> >>>
> >>> Add entries sorted alphabetically. This should be squashed with
> >>> previous
> >>> patch.
> >>
> >> I make it a seperated patch because I think it's a questionable
> >> approach.
> >>
> >> If you think it's okay, I will just squash it and put it as the second
> >> patch in the next iteration, with adding openc906-plic as the first
> >> one.
> >
> >What is a questionable approach? Why commit msg is not saying this?
>
> Ah I mentioned it in the cover letter. The problem is just I doubt whether
> binding strings for single SoCs are necessary.

They are.

Unless all the quirks/bugs/features are somehow guaranteed to be exactly
the same as other SoCs sharing the same compatible string, or there is
another mechanism to identify the exact version (e.g. a version
register).

Rob

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-11-30 19:16    [W:0.287 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site