Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] riscv: dts: starfive: add DeepComputing FML13V01 board device tree

[Alex Elder]

On 10/21/24 7:47 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/10/2024 13:16, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 09:17:59AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2024 at 09:49:59PM +0800, Guodong Xu wrote:
> > > > From: Sandie Cao <sandie.cao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > +&camss {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +&csi2rx {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> >
> > You can drop these two, I marked them disabled in the common file
> > earlier this week.
> > 1
> > > > +
> > > > +&gmac0 {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +&i2c0 {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +&pwm {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +&pwmdac {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +&spi0 {
> > > > +	status = "disabled";
> > >
> > > If your board has to disable all these, then they should not have been
> > > enabled in DTSI in the first place. Only blocks present and working in
> > > the SoC (without amny external needs) should be enabled.
> > >
> > > I suggest to fix that aspect first.
> >
> > Eh, I don't think I agree. Having 5 disables here is a lesser evil than
> > reproducing 90% of jh7110-common.dtsi or shunting a bunch of stuff
> > around. Emil?
>
> Why reproducing 90%? Only enable would be here, no? Or you want to say
> the common DTSI has things which do not exist?

For what it's worth, I agree with Krzysztof.  In the (long) cover
page we pointed this out, and offered to do it in a followup patch.
But if requested we can do it now.

So in v6, a new patch would be inserted before the other three,
and it would:
- Remove the status = "okay" lines for those nodes that are not enabled
  in this new platform, in "jh7110-common.dtsi"
- Add nodes where appropriate in:
    jh7110-milkv-mars.dts
    jh7110-pine64-star64.dts
    jh7110-starfive-visionfive-2.dtsi
  They'll look like this, to enable the ones disabled above, e.g.:
    &gmac0 {
        status = "okay";
    };

    &i2c0 {
        status = "okay";
    };

You guys should come to agreement, but I do think what Krzysztof says
is the right approach.  And unless convinced otherwise, this will be
what shows up in the next version of this series.

					-Alex

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof