From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751102AbeAVMOj (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:14:39 -0500 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]:49899 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751021AbeAVMOi (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:14:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 13:14:35 +0100 From: Maxime Ripard To: Icenowy Zheng Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , Russell King , Daniel Lezcano , Marc Zyngier , Linus Walleij , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] initial support for "suniv" Allwinner new ARM9 SoC Message-ID: <20180122121435.bpayxk4uzfqbhqse@flea.lan> References: <20180119231735.61504-1-icenowy@aosc.io> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jeuhtqwctfssk4ie" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180119231735.61504-1-icenowy@aosc.io> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --jeuhtqwctfssk4ie Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 07:17:26AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > This is the RFC initial patchset for the "new" Allwinner SUNIV ARM9 SoC. >=20 > The same die is packaged differently, come with different co-packaged > DRAM or shipped with different SDK; and then made many model names: F23, > F25, F1C100A, F1C100S, F1C200S, F1C500, F1C600, R6, etc. These SoCs all > share a common feature set and are packaged similarly (eLQFP128 for SoCs > without co-packaged DRAM, QFN88 for with DRAM). As their's no > functionality hidden on the QFN88 models (except DRAM interface not > exported), it's not clever to differentiate them. So I will use suniv as > common name of all these SoCs. Where is that suniv prefix coming from? And you need to have a SoC in all your compatibles. This isn't about being clever or not, this is just a matter of being able to accurately read in a crystal ball. Or maybe it's just the same, in which case, I'd really like to have a course :) You should really answer two questions here: - Are you able to predict whether you'll find an SoC part of that family in the future that derives a bit and will need a compatible of its own? - Are you able to predict which quirks we'll need along the way to support all the SoCs you've listed there? If you can't answer yes to both these questions, with a 100% certainty, then you'll need a SoC name in the compatible. Which doesn't prevent you from sharing as much as possible the DT like we did between the A10s and the A13 for example. Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com --jeuhtqwctfssk4ie Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEE0VqZU19dR2zEVaqr0rTAlCFNr3QFAlpl1aoACgkQ0rTAlCFN r3Sihw//fq2FqLaf2YOdj2sToRGlKYI5WmeXeHiVKSX1S0jGd/8L02RtbSWd0Bvk o2SG1GgP0UMtlrZcyX35SgWp12ofA05+stVDh/5Ff5L6a51AnfbmmOsCNxOMGXHs vRqCFxwtlvKv77BJK6c4Ro2tmppIQAMF2omCwUcwXNsTVQ++RXxJJfiq8bOHxA5a +yYoABmpMdk7u9TVL+G1ZiNMT8FyMMiY5L09FBmVUJohtPlvY/81Uawl+RdcBfbu KyYXvOhf9Wq4fiuU+xFWBXA3xNsyMWLz0DxdAbjAR7tp9TtqbjRxVQHs15DQYM8o i5aVD98tj9h0t6ddP7stbUj9uiFyAI9SJJw+8cEQZuHfU0VqATcwU6JKzMYIGSAS nRw6WbE+MJSVf5E+oSUQ+5p4EACel9jrPsArDzQoGxOzJArO9Ky7du1+ORrDYYF/ erFyDhQyN1/it4Och0QqlIA0VygytgV94+3PycUjN2L6waKRlVb8T2LplApnZmVQ RM/5odWnAlJTxENw4kvBT3OVWuJKC3qYkDgI7pfdH8HglUtA6kyfO3JTO0/nAvwc vYJuT5pvfXCW2sOKlFL47pv/F33yRaZbdCnj5ON36WC54NW7dK7sukS8TGZJARNU 8m6liBg0TVtPJde1y6eWdL4FHJ17WOGjeY7IxwLUK+GfHF+APSI= =7OBU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jeuhtqwctfssk4ie--