[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2874aea5-c012-82cd-2fc6-74ee63ac3d11@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 13:20:47 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: sh_eth: implement R-Car Gen[12]
fallback compatibility strings
On 10/17/2017 10:47 AM, Simon Horman wrote:
> Implement fallback compatibility strings for R-Car Gen 1 and 2.
>
> In the case of Renesas R-Car hardware we know that there are generations of
> SoCs, f.e. Gen 1 and 2. But beyond that its not clear what the relationship
> between IP blocks might be. For example, I believe that r8a7790 is older
> than r8a7791 but that doesn't imply that the latter is a descendant of the
> former or vice versa.
>
> We can, however, by examining the documentation and behaviour of the
> hardware at run-time observe that the current driver implementation appears
> to be compatible with the IP blocks on SoCs within a given generation.
>
> For the above reasons and convenience when enabling new SoCs a
> per-generation fallback compatibility string scheme being adopted for
> drivers for Renesas SoCs.
>
> Note that R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G1 have many compatible IP blocks. The
> approach that has been consistently taken for other IP blocks is to name
> common code, compatibility strings and so on after Rcar Gen2.
R-Car again. :-)
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>
Acked-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
MBR, Sergei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists