Hi Dinh
On Thursday 25 February 2016 10:56:28 Dinh Nguyen wrote:
> On 02/25/2016 04:38 AM, Steffen Trumtrar wrote:
> > Hi Tim!
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:05:05AM +0100, Tim Sander wrote:
> >> From: Tim Sander <t...@krieglstein.org>
> >>
> >> Add a more specific compatible string:"terasic,de0-nano-soc" for
> >> respective board. Background: when checking for bootspec entries, some
> >> board specific fixups are not apropriate for board of the same platform
> >> ("altr,socfpga-cyclone5"). The same aproach is taken with the
> >> EBV-Socrates board.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tim Sander <t...@krieglstein.org>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt | 1 +
> >> arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts | 2 +-
> >> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt
> >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt index
> >> 72e2c5a..d1f7803 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt
> >> @@ -230,6 +230,7 @@ synology Synology, Inc.
> >>
> >> tbs TBS Technologies
> >> tcl Toby Churchill Ltd.
> >> technologic Technologic Systems
> >>
> >> +terasic Terasic Inc.
> >>
> >> thine THine Electronics, Inc.
> >> ti Texas Instruments
> >> tlm Trusted Logic Mobility
> >
> > You should IMHO split this up in two patches.
> > First patch: add terasic
>
> That's right. That patch will go through the DTS maintainer's tree.
Ah well for such a simple patch it turns out more complicated than thought :-)
Will do as soon as there is agreement on a name which does not seem that
easy...
>
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts
> >> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts index
> >> afea364..704aa9d 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts
> >> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts
> >> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
> >>
> >> / {
> >>
> >> model = "Terasic DE-0(Atlas)";
> >>
> >> - compatible = "altr,socfpga-cyclone5", "altr,socfpga";
> >> + compatible = "terasic,de0-nano-soc","altr,socfpga-cyclone5",
> >> "altr,socfpga";
> So perhaps, "terasic,de0-sockit"?
>
> > Second patch: this.
>
> And I can take this one.
>
> >> chosen {
> >>
> >> bootargs = "earlyprintk";
> >
> > The naming of this board still confuses me though.
> >
> > It has 3 different names now:
> > - de0_sockit.dts
> > - Terasic DE-0(Atlas)
> > - de0-nano-soc
> >
> > And according to Terasic DE0-Nano-SoC is the same as Atlas-SoC with a
> > different software?! So all three names are actually correct ?! Weird.
>
> I had a hard time understanding this myself. But from what I gather
> from[1], I just name the file de0_sockit.
As far as i remember there are different de0 and different sockit boards, so
the name does not seem to be as concise? I don't care but i would say that
de0-nano-soc is the most concise and easier to search for than atlas which
might turn up more false postives?
But as long as there is a more selective name than cyclone5 everthing is fine
with me.
Best regards
Tim
