linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] riscv: dts: microchip: make the fabric dtsi board specific

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 04 May 2022 09:11:47 +0200
From:   Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To:     krzk+dt@...nel.org, palmer@...belt.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com
Cc:     Cyril.Jean@...rochip.com, Daire.McNamara@...rochip.com,
        paul.walmsley@...ive.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
        palmer@...osinc.com, arnd@...db.de, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mail@...chuod.ie
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] riscv: dts: microchip: make the fabric dtsi board specific

Am Mittwoch, 4. Mai 2022, 08:48:24 CEST schrieb Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com:
> On 04/05/2022 00:47, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> > 
> > Am Sonntag, 1. Mai 2022, 21:25:56 CEST schrieb Conor Dooley:
> >> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> >>
> >> Currently mpfs-fabric.dtsi is included by mpfs.dtsi - which is fine
> >> currently since there is only one board with this SoC upstream.
> >>
> >> However if another board was added, it would include the fabric contents
> >> of the Icicle Kit's reference design. To avoid this, rename
> >> mpfs-fabric.dtsi to mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi & include it in the dts
> >> rather than mpfs.dtsi.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> >> ---
> >>   .../microchip/{mpfs-fabric.dtsi => mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi} | 2 ++
> >>   arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-icicle-kit.dts               | 1 +
> >>   arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs.dtsi                         | 1 -
> >>   3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>   rename arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/{mpfs-fabric.dtsi => mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi} (91%)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-fabric.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi
> >> similarity index 91%
> >> rename from arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-fabric.dtsi
> >> rename to arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi
> >> index ccaac3371cf9..0d28858b83f2 100644
> >> --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-fabric.dtsi
> >> +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/microchip/mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi
> >> @@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
> >>   /* Copyright (c) 2020-2021 Microchip Technology Inc */
> >>
> >>   / {
> >> +     compatible = "microchip,mpfs-icicle-reference-rtlv2203", "microchip,mpfs";
> >> +
> > 
> > I don't really understand the meaning of the added compatible yet.
> 
> 
> I added it for informational purposes more than anything else.
> The contents of this file match the 22.03 reference design for
> the icicle kit's FPGA fabric & an older version of the design
> may not have the i2c or pwm devices.

that makes sense, thanks for the explanation :-)

Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>


> > It will get overridden by the compatible in the dts and also the
> > fabric dtsi for the polarberry does not contain a similar thing.
> 
> I did not add one for the polarberry b/c it has (to my knowledge)
> no versioning scheme nor fabric peripherals in the design given
> to customers.
> 
> Thanks,
> Conor.
>