Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions

2019-05-28 Thread Leonard Crestez
On 22.05.2019 16:40, Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 22.05.2019, 13:30 + schrieb Leonard Crestez: >> On 22.05.2019 16:13, Guido Günther wrote: >>> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions >>> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:40:18PM

Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions

2019-05-22 Thread Lucas Stach
Am Mittwoch, den 22.05.2019, 13:30 + schrieb Leonard Crestez: > On 22.05.2019 16:13, Guido Günther wrote: > > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions > > Fixed subject > > > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:40:18PM +0200, Guido Günther wrot

Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions

2019-05-22 Thread Leonard Crestez
On 22.05.2019 16:13, Guido Günther wrote: > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions Fixed subject > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 02:40:18PM +0200, Guido Günther wrote: >> Thanks for your comments. Let's try s.th. different then: identify by >&g

[RFC PATCH] soc: imx: Try harder to get imq8mq SoC revisions

2019-05-08 Thread Guido Günther
Hi Leonard, Thanks for your comments. Let's try s.th. different then: identify by bootrom, ocotop and anatop and fall back to ATF afterwards (I'll split out the DT part and add binding docs if this makes sense). I'm also happy to drop the whole ATF logic until mailine ATF catched up: The