[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <15ddd798-873e-d90d-11e9-c6dd46ca03f4@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 16:42:36 +0300
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...labora.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>
Cc: kernel@...labora.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: dts: imx8mp-msc-sm2s: Add device trees for
MSC SM2S-IMX8PLUS SoM and carrier board
On 12/08/2022 14:35, Martyn Welch wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-08-12 at 12:47 +0300, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 12/08/2022 11:41, Martyn Welch wrote:
>>> Add device trees for one of a number of MSC's (parent company,
>>> Avnet)
>>> variants of the SM2S-IMX8PLUS system on module along with the
>>> compatible
>>> SM2S-SK-AL-EP1 carrier board. As the name suggests, this family of
>>> SoMs use
>>> the NXP i.MX8MP SoC and provide the SMARC module interface.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Martyn Welch <martyn.welch@...labora.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v2
>>> - Added compatibles
>>> - Removed underscores from node names
>>> - Make node names more generic
>>> - Reorder properties
>>> - Fix issues found by dtbs_check in these files
>>>
>>> Changes in v3:
>>> - Switched to avnet vendor string in compatibles
>>> - Corrected patch description
>>>
>>> Changes in v4:
>>> - Switched from phy-reset-gpios to reset-gpios, removing
>>> duplication
>>> - Removed unneeded sdma1 node
>>>
>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/Makefile | 1 +
>>> .../freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-14N0600E.dts | 72 ++
>>> .../dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-ep1.dts | 53 ++
>>> .../boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s.dtsi | 812
>>> ++++++++++++++++++
>>> 4 files changed, 938 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-
>>> 14N0600E.dts
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-
>>> ep1.dts
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-
>>> sm2s.dtsi
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/Makefile
>>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/Makefile
>>> index 8bf7f7ecebaa..139c8b95c9c9 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/Makefile
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/Makefile
>>> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mn-venice-
>>> gw7902.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-dhcom-pdk2.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-evk.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-icore-mx8mp-edimm2.2.dtb
>>> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-msc-sm2s-ep1.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-phyboard-pollux-rdk.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-tqma8mpql-mba8mpxl.dtb
>>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MXC) += imx8mp-venice-gw74xx.dtb
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-
>>> 14N0600E.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-
>>> 14N0600E.dts
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..9e976e8baaee
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8mp-msc-sm2s-14N0600E.dts
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>> +/*
>>> + * Copyright (C) 2022 Avnet Embedded GmbH
>>> + */
>>> +/dts-v1/;
>>> +
>>> +#include "imx8mp-msc-sm2s.dtsi"
>>> +
>>> +/ {
>>> + model = "MSC SM2S-IMX8PLUS-QC6-14N0600E SoM";
>>> + compatible = "avnet,sm2s-imx8mp-14N0600E", "avnet,sm2s-
>>> imx8mp",
>>> + "fsl,imx8mp";
>>
>> This does not match your bindings. Please test your DTS.
>>
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> I'm not sure I follow. This is the DTS for the SoM.
SoMs usually do not have DTSes because they cannot be run on their own.
SoMs almost always require a baseboard/carrier. Therefore this should
not be DTS, but that was not my comment.
> The only way I can
> test the SoM at the moment is on combination with the "EP1" carrier
> board.
... so you basically say it cannot be a DTS.
> That has been tested. The strings match those specified in the
> bindings unless I'm being blind to something.
Test the DTS - make dtbs_check (there are several
variations/arguments/helpers):
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-schema.rst
>
> I guess I can build the DTB for just the SoM
But you just did it, didn't you? This is a DTS.
> and boot with that or
> thinking about it, rename this as a .dtsi, given that it's unlikely
> that anyone is going to have a carrier barebones enough that it could
> be considered just the SoM?
Anyway, I wanted DT bindings tests for DTS. Not actual tests on
hardware, because the compatibles do not matter in that aspect.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists