Re: [PATCH 11/11] soc: ti: k3-socinfo: Add entry for AM64 SoC family

[Vignesh Raghavendra]

On 10/1/20 12:12 PM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Hi Grygorii,
> 
> On 30/09/2020 16.56, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28/09/2020 11:34, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
>>> It's JTAG PARTNO is 0xBB38.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c | 1 +
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c
>>> index bbbc2d2b7091..a14ec68846dd 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/ti/k3-socinfo.c
>>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static const struct k3_soc_id {
>>>       { 0xBB5A, "AM65X" },
>>>       { 0xBB64, "J721E" },
>>>       { 0xBB6D, "J7200" },
>>> +    { 0xBB38, "AM64" }
>>
>> Shouldn't it be AM64X
> 
> Good point, I'll fix this up and then the DMA series.
> 
> While here, what do you think: should we keep the DMA compatibles as I
> have them in v1 (am64-dmss-bcdma and am64-dmss-pktdma):
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-10-peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxx/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200930091412.8020-11-peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxx/
> 
> or change them to am64x-dmss-* ?
> 
> I'll ask Rob on the binding doc patches as well.

As long as differences within the family are discoverable by some other
means, wild chars may be okay. See one of Rob's earlier responses:

https://linuxlists.cc/l/1/linux-kernel/t/3311057/(patch_1_2)_dt-bindings:_ptp:_add_binding_doc_for_idt_clockmatrix_based_ptp_clock

Regards
Vignesh