[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAODwPW9djbQszxqmMF4N8E5fg58A_N5=TNw0SXZf4UYTvp6R3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 18:05:45 -0700
From: Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Jian-Jia Su <jjsu@...gle.com>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] dt-bindings: memory: Describing LPDDR topology
> Thanks for the patches. Where are the users of these bindings? Although
> bindings do not have requirement of providing user (as kernel API has),
> but this is quite a rework so I want to see that it is applicable. That
> it matches real use case and need. I can do it only with real DTS in the
> kernel.
Well, the whole point of the new compatible string format is that it
can be generated by boot firmware at runtime, so I don't have a static
DTS with this that I can check into the kernel tree. The first user of
these bindings will be the
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-herobrine-villager-r0.dts board that's
already in the tree, but since these nodes get generated you won't see
them in that file. It's kinda like /chosen/kaslr-seed, that's also a
valid binding with a schema description that's actively being used but
doesn't show up in any DTS file checked into the tree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists