linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for AM62D2-EVM

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

Message-ID: <6f151fc8-ff95-4e1a-b92f-4e908f62e979@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 14:16:15 +0530
From: Paresh Bhagat <p-bhagat@...com>
To: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, <nm@...com>, <praneeth@...com>
CC: <kristo@...nel.org>, <robh@...nel.org>, <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <khasim@...com>, <v-singh1@...com>, <afd@...com>, <bb@...com>,
        <devarsht@...com>, <s-vadapalli@...com>, <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] arm64: dts: ti: Add support for AM62D2-EVM

Hi,


On 04/07/25 09:40, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
> Hi
>
> [...]
>
> On 27/06/25 17:27, Paresh Bhagat wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62d2.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62d2.dtsi
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..70aeb40872a9
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am62d2.dtsi
>> @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR MIT
>> +/*
>> + * Device Tree Source for AM62D2 SoC family in Quad core configuration
>> + *
>> + * TRM: https://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/sprujd4
>> + *
>> + * Copyright (C) 2025 Texas Instruments Incorporated - https://www.ti.com/
>> + */
>> +
>> +/dts-v1/;
>> +
>> +#include "k3-am62a7.dtsi"
>> +
>> +/ {
>> +	model = "Texas Instruments K3 AM62D SoC";
>> +	compatible = "ti,am62d2";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&vpu {
>> +	status = "disabled";
>> +};
>> +
>> +&e5010 {
>> +	status = "disabled";
>> +};
>
> Norm seems to be to use /delete-node/ here instead. Please respin
> accordingly.


Yep makes sense to delete the node itself. Will update this.
>