[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7AB137701821F94BAF7B06C1747BA691011A3FE164@OS01.os.local>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2019 10:18:18 +0000
From: Ryan Pannell <ryan@...kl.com>
To: Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
CC: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com"
<linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add Oceanic A64-5inMFD
initial support
Jagan,
The compatible is for the real hardware name as Maxime previously explained. The platform is described in the latter part.
Please use:
compatible = "oceanic,5205-5inmfd", "allwinner,sun50i-a64";
Thanks,
Ryan Pannell
Development Team Lead
Oceanic Systems (UK) Ltd
-----Original Message-----
From: Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>
Sent: 06 March 2019 09:36
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
Cc: Ryan Pannell <ryan@...kl.com>; Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>; Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>; Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>; linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>; devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>; linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>; linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: allwinner: a64: Add Oceanic A64-5inMFD initial support
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 2:57 PM Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 04:35:04PM +0000, Ryan Pannell wrote:
> > We don't mind if it has to be:
> > compatible = "oceanic,5inmfd", "allwinner,sun50i-a64";
> >
> > However, to avoid confusion, might it be worth including the part number (We list this as '5205 5" MFD') so this would become:
> > compatible = "oceanic,5205-5inmfd", "allwinner,sun50i-a64";
> >
> > Perhaps this solves the issue. Please let me know thoughts.
>
> Yep, that works for me
A64 instead of part-number 5205 seems less confused isn't it? or we need to give more priority with real hardware definition?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists