Hi Leo, thanks for the quick reply!
On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 06:33:57 +0000
Leo Liang <ycli...@andestech.com> wrote:
> Hi, Torsten, Matthias,
>
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 02:34:03PM +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 19/04/2023 13:28, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > > This is only a proof of concept; let me know if you like it and I
> > > can add the other 12 DT patches to adjust_for_rev13b(), or maybe
> > > start with 1.3b as the default and go the other way, or something
> > > in between.
> LGTM as well!
Thank you very much! Again, this is only a PoC; if you agree with the
concept, I clean it up and fill in the complete DT patching.
Questions: shall I default to 1.3B and patch older 1.2A, or vice versa,
or do it like your (starfive) patch set and start with something
"neutral" and then patch both ways? And, more important, what is the
correct interpretation of the board revision byte -- I assume it's
offset 0x76 in the EEPROM? Is it always? Is ">= 0xB2" the correct
discriminator?
Torsten
