All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: thor.thayer@linux.intel.com
To: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
	bp@alien8.de, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	mchehab@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCHv2,4/4] arm64: dts: stratix10: Add OCRAM EDAC node
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:42:13 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e02b1065-c81a-80f3-1790-f8f7dbfe4831@linux.intel.com> (raw)

On 1/23/19 10:56 AM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/22/19 11:48 AM, thor.thayer@linux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Add the OCRAM ECC node following the Arria10 format.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> v2  No changes
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> index 8253a1a9e985..a625dc472b91 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> @@ -494,6 +494,13 @@
>>   				interrupts = <16 4>, <48 4>;
>>   			};
>>   
>> +			ocram-ecc@ff8cc000 {
>> +				compatible = "altr,socfpga-a10-ocram-ecc";
> 
> Are you absolutely sure there are no differences in the Stratix10 versus
> A10? I wonder if it would be safer to have a platform specific binding
> for Stratix10 rather than re-using A10. It would prevent from having to
> change bindings later.
> 
> Dinh
> 

They are the same functionally. However, you bring up a good point. 
There are differences related to the underlying architecture - 32bit vs 
64bit.

I will respin this series (except for the first fixup patch) with new 
bindings for S10.

Thanks,

Thor

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@linux.intel.com>
To: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>,
	bp@alien8.de, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com,
	mchehab@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] arm64: dts: stratix10: Add OCRAM EDAC node
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 09:42:13 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e02b1065-c81a-80f3-1790-f8f7dbfe4831@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4763af33-0cae-bc82-8963-41554ee56ea5@kernel.org>

On 1/23/19 10:56 AM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/22/19 11:48 AM, thor.thayer@linux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> Add the OCRAM ECC node following the Arria10 format.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> v2  No changes
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi | 7 +++++++
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> index 8253a1a9e985..a625dc472b91 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/altera/socfpga_stratix10.dtsi
>> @@ -494,6 +494,13 @@
>>   				interrupts = <16 4>, <48 4>;
>>   			};
>>   
>> +			ocram-ecc@ff8cc000 {
>> +				compatible = "altr,socfpga-a10-ocram-ecc";
> 
> Are you absolutely sure there are no differences in the Stratix10 versus
> A10? I wonder if it would be safer to have a platform specific binding
> for Stratix10 rather than re-using A10. It would prevent from having to
> change bindings later.
> 
> Dinh
> 

They are the same functionally. However, you bring up a good point. 
There are differences related to the underlying architecture - 32bit vs 
64bit.

I will respin this series (except for the first fixup patch) with new 
bindings for S10.

Thanks,

Thor

             reply	other threads:[~2019-01-24 15:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-24 15:42 thor.thayer [this message]
2019-01-24 15:42 ` [PATCHv2 4/4] arm64: dts: stratix10: Add OCRAM EDAC node Thor Thayer
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-01-23 16:56 [PATCHv2,4/4] " Dinh Nguyen
2019-01-23 16:56 ` [PATCHv2 4/4] " Dinh Nguyen
2019-01-22 17:48 [PATCHv2,4/4] " thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 ` [PATCHv2 4/4] " thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 [PATCHv2,3/4] EDAC, altera: Add Stratix10 OCRAM ECC support thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 ` [PATCHv2 3/4] " thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 [PATCHv2,2/4] EDAC, altera: Less Intrusive Error Injection thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 ` [PATCHv2 2/4] " thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 [PATCHv2,1/4] EDAC, altera: Fix S10 persistent register offset thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 ` [PATCHv2 1/4] " thor.thayer
2019-01-22 17:48 [PATCHv2 0/4] Stratix10 EDAC Improvements thor.thayer
2019-01-23 12:22 ` Borislav Petkov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=e02b1065-c81a-80f3-1790-f8f7dbfe4831@linux.intel.com \
    --to=thor.thayer@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dinguyen@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.