From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hdegoede@redhat.com (Hans de Goede) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 13:05:03 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] ARM: dts: sun8i: Extend Orange Pi PC dt to also handle the PC Plus In-Reply-To: <20160831162819.GK14379@lukather> References: <1468095718-18515-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20160713084505.GE4761@lukather> <20160725064033.GA7419@lukather> <74d3b5eb-601a-cc1d-a44e-fea2895fd8b2@redhat.com> <20160728181757.GD6682@lukather> <20160831162819.GK14379@lukather> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On 31-08-16 18:28, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi Hans, > > Sorry for the slow response, it was burried in my inbox. > > On Sun, Aug 07, 2016 at 04:25:20PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 28-07-16 22:36, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 28-07-16 20:17, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>>> Hi Hans, >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:07:23PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>>>>>> Nothing prevents you from including the orange pi pc dts, from the >>>>>>>> orange pi plus dts. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It prevents the duplication you were trying to avoid, and it doesn't >>>>>>>> create all those spurious errors and devices. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That would solve the copy paste problem on the kernel side, but that >>>>>>> would still mean adding a new u-boot defconfig for this, which means that >>>>>>> all the distro's which ship with prebuild u-boot binaries need to build >>>>>>> for yet another board, something which I would like to avoid. >>>>>> >>>>>> Still, registering devices that are not present on the board is not an >>>>>> option. >>>>> >>>>> Ok, new version send. >>>>> >>>>> What about the other 3 patches in this series ? >>>> >>>> I guess the same comment applies for patch 2. >>> >>> The difference is that there really is no harm at all from >>> enabling the extra usb controllers used on the plus 2e >>> on the plus and plus 2 as well, no errors, no nothing, they >>> just sit their as usb controllers without an usb device plugged >>> in. But if you insist I can do a separate dts + u-boot defconfig >>> for the plus 2e as well (but I would rather not). >> >> Ping, what is the verdict on this, are you ok with the patch or >> do you want me to create a separate dts file for the Orange Pi >> Plus 2E, note that doing so is going to be highly confusing to >> users, there are 3 plus boards: > > I still believe that enabling clocks, regulators, claiming pins for > device that are entirely unused on the board is not ok. > >> Orange Pi Plus >> Orange Pi Plus 2 (same as the original plus but with 2G RAM, uses same u-boot defconfig / dts file) > > Yes, that makes sense. > >> Orange Pi Plus 2E (drops the USB-hub instead using all 3 host controllers) > > However, I'm really worried about this one. If we go this way, there's > essentially no going back. If for some reason we want to have a > separate DT in the future (some unforeseen quirk to apply, pin to > setup that conflicts on another board, etc.), we will be completely > screwed because our users will be expecting to use the common DT, > while it wouldn't be wise anymore. > > The other way around is much easier to deal with. OK, fair enough, one patch to add a separate dts file for the plus 2e coming up. Regards, Hans