Hi, On 19.04.19 17:20, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 4/19/19 5:06 PM, Parthiban Nallathambi wrote: >> Hello Marek, >> >> On 4/19/19 3:35 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: >>> On 4/19/19 3:18 PM, Parthiban Nallathambi wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> [...] >>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig >>>>>> index d29f1ca0b5..9336439340 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig >>>>>> @@ -186,6 +186,7 @@ source "board/ti/am43xx/Kconfig" >>>>>> source "board/ti/am335x/Kconfig" >>>>>> source "board/compulab/cm_t335/Kconfig" >>>>>> source "board/compulab/cm_t43/Kconfig" >>>>>> +source "board/phytec/phycore_pcl060/Kconfig" >>>>> Here [1] it says the name of the SoM is PCM-060 , what is PCL-060 ? >>>>> >>>>> [1] >>>>> https://www.phytec.eu/product-eu/system-on-modules/phycore-am335x-download/ >>>>> [...] >>>> This differs only by the connector. PCM variants are pluggable and PCL >>>> variants >>>> are direct soliderable to the carrier board. >>>> >>>> Copied from [1]: >>>> The PCL-060 System On Module is a connector-less, BGA style variant of the >>>> PCM-060/phyCORE-AM335x R2 SOM. Unlike traditional Phytec SOM products that >>>> support >>>> high density connectors, the PCL-060 SOM is directly soldered down to the >>>> phyBOARD-Wega AM335x using Phytec's Direct Solder Connect technology >>>> (DSC). This >>>> solution offers an ultra-low cost Single Board Computer for the AM335x >>>> processor, while >>>> maintaining most of the advantages of the SOM concept. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://www.phytec.de/fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/Manuals/L-845e_1.pdf >>> Ah damn, this looks like a consistency problem is coming up. We have >>> multiple PCM* SoMs in U-Boot, one PCL* SoM and now another PCL/PCM SoM. >>> But the PCL063 isn't even manufactured in variant with connectors, so I >>> guess we can ignore that one. >>> >>> I wonder whether we should stick to PCM* for all of the Phytec SoMs for >>> consistency sake and document that PCL060 is also supported or maybe >>> there's a better way ? >> Does PCX/PCx makes sense? But we have the same problem with variscite [1] >> SoM's >> (either SODIMM or solderable). >> >> [1] https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2019-April/365667.html > PCX would introduce another option, in addition to PCM/PCL, one which > cannot be easily found on the internet, so I'd like to avoid that. I > am banking toward the sticking with PCM where possible (simply because > that's what $searchengine spits out first when you look for that SoM, > and because we already have plenty of PCM-nnn SoMs), but maybe someone > has a better idea .
why not simply use the full name of the module instead? - phyCORE-AM335x - phyCORE-AM335x R2 I did the same for the phyCORE-RK3288. There is no real difference between a PCM and PCL SOM. You can take look at the barebox code for this modules to get some inspiration on how to handle the different SOM variants. https://git.pengutronix.de/cgit/barebox/tree/arch/arm/boards/phytec-som-am335x Regards, Wadim > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
