Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: arm: Add SolidRun LX2162A SoM & Clearfog Board

[Josua Mayer]

Hi Andreas,

Am 16.06.23 um 19:57 schrieb Andreas Kemnade:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 16:32:01 +0300
> Josua Mayer <josua@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > HI Krzysztof,
> >
> > Am 16.06.23 um 14:36 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> > > On 16/06/2023 13:06, Josua Mayer wrote:
> > > > Add DT compatible for SolidRun LX2162A SoM and Clearfog board.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Josua Mayer <josua@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >    Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml | 2 ++
> > > >    1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> > > > index 15d411084065..438a4ece8157 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/fsl.yaml
> > > > @@ -1373,9 +1373,11 @@ properties:
> > > >          - description: SolidRun LX2160A based Boards
> > > >            items:
> > > >              - enum:
> > > > +              - solidrun,clearfog
> > > >                  - solidrun,clearfog-cx
> > > >                  - solidrun,honeycomb
> > > >              - const: solidrun,lx2160a-cex7
> > > > +          - const: solidrun,lx2162a-som
> > > >              - const: fsl,lx2160a
> > > You change existing entries, breaking boards and changing the meaning,
> > > without any explanation in commit msg. That's not how it is done. Please
> > > provide rationale in commit msg.
> > I'm sorry. Given your comment I think I did not understand how these
> > entries are supposed to work.
> > So perhaps you can provide some guidance based on my explanation?:
> it breaks:
> arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-lx2160a-clearfog-cx.dts
> compatible = "solidrun,clearfog-cx",
>                  "solidrun,lx2160a-cex7", "fsl,lx2160a";
>
> now you would require:
> compatible = "solidrun,clearfog-cx",
>                  "solidrun,lx2160a-cex7", "solidrun,lx2162a-som", "fsl,lx2160a"
I see, thanks!
The more I look at it, the more logical this behaviour seems.
> which is probably not what you want.

Yep. I wanted to keep the 3 components, and allow forking in the middle:

"solidrun,<board>", "solidrun,<module>", "fsl,lx2160a"

This however creates many combinations that are undesirable.
Existing boards using com express don't suddenly become compatible with 
the new SoM.
Therefore I prepared a different approach vor v2 now.

> Regards,
> Andreas
- Josua Mayer