Re: [PATCH v3 02/14] drivers: soc: sunxi: Add dedicated compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:44 AM, Paul Kocialkowski wrote: > This introduces platform-specific compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33 > SRAM driver. No particular adaptation for these platforms is required at > this point, although this might become the case in the future. > > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski > --- > drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > index 74cb81f37bd6..43ebc3bd33f2 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > @@ -315,6 +315,9 @@ static int sunxi_sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > static const struct of_device_id sunxi_sram_dt_match[] = { > { .compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-sram-controller" }, > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun5i-a13-sram-controller" }, > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun7i-a20-sram-controller" }, > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-sram-controller" }, We should probably name these "system-controller". Maxime? ChenYu > { .compatible = "allwinner,sun50i-a64-sram-controller" }, > { }, > }; > -- > 2.16.3 >
Re: [PATCH v3 02/14] drivers: soc: sunxi: Add dedicated compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:05:33PM -0700, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:44 AM, Paul Kocialkowski > wrote: > > This introduces platform-specific compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33 > > SRAM driver. No particular adaptation for these platforms is required at > > this point, although this might become the case in the future. > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski > > --- > > drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > index 74cb81f37bd6..43ebc3bd33f2 100644 > > --- a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > +++ b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > @@ -315,6 +315,9 @@ static int sunxi_sram_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > > > static const struct of_device_id sunxi_sram_dt_match[] = { > > { .compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-sram-controller" }, > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun5i-a13-sram-controller" }, > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun7i-a20-sram-controller" }, > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-sram-controller" }, > > We should probably name these "system-controller". Maxime? This would make sense yes, but we don't really need to add the A20 one to the driver, it's exactly the same than the A10. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [PATCH v3 02/14] drivers: soc: sunxi: Add dedicated compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33
Hi, On Fri, 2018-05-11 at 12:20 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 10:05:33PM -0700, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:44 AM, Paul Kocialkowski > > wrote: > > > This introduces platform-specific compatibles for the A13, A20 and A33 > > > SRAM driver. No particular adaptation for these platforms is required at > > > this point, although this might become the case in the future. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul Kocialkowski > > > --- > > > drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c | 3 +++ > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > > b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > > index 74cb81f37bd6..43ebc3bd33f2 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/sunxi/sunxi_sram.c > > > @@ -315,6 +315,9 @@ static int sunxi_sram_probe(struct platform_device > > > *pdev) > > > > > > static const struct of_device_id sunxi_sram_dt_match[] = { > > > { .compatible = "allwinner,sun4i-a10-sram-controller" }, > > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun5i-a13-sram-controller" }, > > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun7i-a20-sram-controller" }, > > > + { .compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-sram-controller" }, > > > > We should probably name these "system-controller". Maxime? Would you like me to make that change for v4 of this series, or have it a separate follow-up patch outside of this series? > This would make sense yes, but we don't really need to add the A20 one > to the driver, it's exactly the same than the A10. Noted, I'll ditch the a20 compatible from the next revison of the series. Thanks for the feedback, Paul -- Paul Kocialkowski, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and kernel engineering https://bootlin.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part