Re: [PATCH 14/18] ARM: mvebu: add support for the Armada 395 SoC family

[Rob Herring]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Gregory CLEMENT
<gregory.clement@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>  On lun., juil. 25 2016, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2016 10:12:43 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, I get that, but that is only meaningful if you want to run an OS
>>> that is only aware of 395 on a 398 SoC/board (though I'd guess the 390
>>> compat is enough for that). Otherwise, that property is not really
>>> meaningful as the additional nodes are enough to handle what is the
>>> superset.
>>>
>>> I would agree both are fine if both chips are in fact the same die,
>>> just fused or packaged differently. I've seen a lot of chips that are
>>> supposed to be sub/supersets of each other, but have different errata
>>> lists because they are different die.
>>
>> Unfortunately HW vendors are rarely willing to publicly indicate whether
>> the different chips in their families are actually the same die fused
>> differently, or really different dies.

Then it is safest to assume they are different.

> So do you want that we keep both "marvell,armada398" and
> "marvell,armada395" or do you xant we use only "marvell,armada398" ?

For the 398 based boards, I think it should only have
"marvell,armada398" and don't add "marvell,armada395".

Rob