On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:45:15PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 11/12/2020 10:31:43+0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > Since at91_soc_init is called unconditionally from atmel_soc_device_init,
> > we get the following warning on all non AT91 SoCs:
> > " AT91: Could not find identification node"
> >
> > Fix the same by filtering with allowed AT91 SoC list.
> >
> > Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.fe...@microchip.com>
> > Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.bell...@bootlin.com>
> > Cc: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroc...@microchip.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/soc/atmel/soc.c | 11 +++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/soc/atmel/soc.c b/drivers/soc/atmel/soc.c
> > index c4472b68b7c2..ba9fc07cd91c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/soc/atmel/soc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/soc/atmel/soc.c
> > @@ -271,8 +271,19 @@ struct soc_device * __init at91_soc_init(const struct
> > at91_soc *socs)
> > return soc_dev;
> > }
> >
> > +static const struct of_device_id at91_soc_allowed_list[] __initconst = {
> > + { .compatible = "atmel,at91rm9200", },
> > + { .compatible = "atmel,at91sam9260", },
> > + { .compatible = "atmel,sama5d2", },
>
> This is a very small subset of the supported SoCs. a proper list would
> be:
>
> atmel,at91rm9200
> atmel,at91sam9
> atmel,sama5
> atmel,samv7
>
Sure I can update it but the existing functions at91_get_cidr_exid_from_chipid
and at91_get_cidr_exid_from_dbgu check for following 3 compatibles and bail
out if not found:
"atmel,at91rm9200-dbgu"
"atmel,at91sam9260-dbgu"
"atmel,sama5d2-chipid"
Quick check on DTS upstream suggested only 3 platforms, hence the choice.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
