Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1451881 > unrolled thread

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

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 14/18] ARM: mvebu: add support for the Armada 395 SoC family Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> - 2016-07-28 13:20 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 14/18] ARM: mvebu: add support for the Armada 395 SoC family Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> - 2016-07-28 18:10 +0200

#1451881 — Re: [PATCH 14/18] ARM: mvebu: add support for the Armada 395 SoC family

Hi Rob,
 
 On lun., juil. 25 2016, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> 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.

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

Thanks,

Gregory


>
> Thomas
> -- 
> Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
> http://free-electrons.com

-- 
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1451997

On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 6:19 AM, Gregory CLEMENT
<gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
>  On lun., juil. 25 2016, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> 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

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web