[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190907170902.GJ52127@atomide.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 10:09:02 -0700
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc: Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>,
André Roth <neolynx@...il.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>,
Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>,
Teresa Remmet <t.remmet@...tec.de>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org,
kernel@...a-handheld.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ARM: dts: omap3: bulk convert compatible to be
explicitly ti,omap3430 or ti,omap3630 or ti,am3517
* H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> [190907 06:57]:
> For the ti-cpufreq driver we need a clear separation between omap34 and omap36 families
> since they have different silicon revisions and efuses.
>
> So far ti,omap3630/ti,omap36xx is just an additional flag to ti,omap3 while omap34 has no
> required entry.
>
> Therefore we can not match omap34 boards properly.
>
> This needs to add ti,omap3430 and ti,omap3630 where it is missing.
>
> We also clean up some instances of missing ti,am3517 so that we can rely on
> seeing either one of:
>
> ti,am3517
> ti,omap3430
> ti,omap3630
>
> in addition to ti,omap3.
>
> We leave ti,omap34xx and ti,omap36xx untouched for compatibility.
Thanks for doing this:
Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists