[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d09d6c0-0404-589d-2c34-da846cff4fb8@suse.de>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 15:20:11 +0200
From: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
To: aleksandr.aleksandrov@...id.com,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
Noralf Trønnes <noralf@...nnes.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: new board - Emlid Neutis N5
Hi Aleksandr,
Please keep your replies in text-only format, not HTML.
Am 11.10.18 um 14:01 schrieb aleksandr.aleksandrov@...id.com:
>> +/ {
>> + model = "Emlid Neutis N5 Developer board";
>> + compatible = "emlid,emlid-neutis-n5-devboard",
>> + "emlid,emlid-neutis-n5",
>>
>> Do you need the two emlid there? What comes before the comma is the
>> vendor, while what is after is the model.
>
> I think emlid-neutis-n5 module could be useful in the future, no need
> this now.
You misunderstand: The point would be to use, e.g., "emlid,neutis-n5"
instead of "emlid,emlid-neutis-n5" with duplicate "emlid,emlid-". It is
orthogonal to having multiple compatible strings.
>> +&uart1 {
>> + pinctrl-names = "default";
>> + pinctrl-0 = <&uart1_pins>, <&uart1_rts_cts_pins>;
>> + status = "okay";
>> +};
>>
>> I guess this is for bluetooth? Have you tested serdev drivers?
>>
> Yes, bluetooth is connected over uart1.
> You mean if I have tested bluetooth stack via serial device?
Not quite, we're missing a child node within uart1 for a serdev driver.
Is there no such driver yet for your Bluetooth chipset, or did you not
yet check?
> Bluez works stably with bcm43xx over uart 1500000 baud rate.
>
>>
>> Also, I have a general comments, and it really depends on what your
>> intention about the board ecosystem is. Do you expect the SOM to be
>> swappable in multiple boards, or do you expect to send it as something
>> that is just fixed into a daughter board?
>>
>> In the former case, you probably want to use overlays instead. In the
>> latter, you're fine.
>>
> Right, we expect the SoM to be swappable. I agree, to use overlays is
> more convenient, but
> the devboard DT file will be a reference for the overlays and the future
> boards based on Neutis.
What about just keeping the common nodes enabled in a SoM .dts, so that
the average board doesn't need an Overlay for booting?
@Maxime/Rob, is it possible to merge .dtso files these days? If not,
could that be considered in the big dts Makefile refactoring? :)
Cheers,
Andreas
--
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists