[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231108-copper-scoff-b4de5febb954@spud>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 10:28:21 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, monstr@...str.eu,
michal.simek@...inx.com, git@...inx.com,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: soc: Add new board description for
MicroBlaze V
On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:24:20AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>
>
> On 11/8/23 11:12, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 11:06:53AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 11/7/23 22:18, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 07, 2023 at 12:09:58PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/6/23 18:07, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 12:53:40PM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
> > > > > > > MicroBlaze V is new AMD/Xilinx soft-core 32bit RISC-V processor IP.
> > > > > > > It is hardware compatible with classic MicroBlaze processor. Processor can
> > > > > > > be used with standard AMD/Xilinx IPs including interrupt controller and
> > > > > > > timer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > .../devicetree/bindings/soc/amd/amd.yaml | 26 +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bindings for SoCs (and by extension boards with them) usually go to in
> > > > > > $arch/$vendor.yaml not into soc/$vendor/$vendor.yaml. Why is this any
> > > > > > different?
> > > > >
> > > > > I actually found it based on tracking renesas.yaml which describes one of
> > > > > risc-v board. No problem to move it under bindings/riscv/
> > > >
> > > > That one is kinda a special case, as it contains arm/arm64/riscv.
> > >
> > > If they are kinda a special case then what are we?
> > > All AMD/Xilinx platforms(ZynqMP/Versal/Versal NET) can have
> > > arm/arm64/riscv/microblaze cpus(riscv/microblaze as soft cores) in the same
> > > board (IIRC I have also seen xtensa soft core on our chips too).
> >
> > That would be an argument iff you had all of those in a single file, not
> > when you only have a single compatible for a riscv "soc" in it.
>
> But DT (compare to System DT) is all the time describing system from cpu
> point of view. Or are they describing all that 3 different cpus via the same
> DT?
Please look at the contents of renesas.yaml & the commit that moved it
to its current location. I'm only talking about the binding, not any
users.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists