[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fbba971d7501c774ce0081f22dcff4ef74002a4d.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 11:18:39 +0100
From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
To: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de>,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: dts: stm32: add STM32MP1-based Linux
Automation MC-1 board
On Mo, 2020-03-02 at 11:06 +0100, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Ahmad
>
> Thanks for adding a new STM32 board. Some minor comments.
>
> On 2/26/20 3:38 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> > The Linux Automation MC-1 is a SBC built around the Octavo Systems
> > OSD32MP15x SiP. The SiP features up to 1 GB DDR3 RAM, EEPROM and
> > a PMIC. The board has eMMC and a SD slot for storage and GbE
> > for both connectivity and power.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de
> > ---
[...]
> > +
> > +&gpu {
> > + status = "okay";
> > +};
This question is more to the ST guys than this specific DT: Why is the
GPU marked as disabled in the SoC dtsi file? This device is always
present on the SoC and AFAICS there are no board level dependencies, so
there is no reason to have it disabled by default, right? Removing the
status property from the dtsi would remove the need for this override
on the board DT.
Regards,
Lucas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists