lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: portable device tree connector -- problem statement
From
Date
Hi Mark,

> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:31 , Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, I have no previous detailed knowledge of the beagle
>> family.
>
> This is in no way specific to the BeagleBones, there's plenty of other
> boards out there with similar setups like the Raspberry Pi and its
> derivatives.
>

There are a lot of custom vendor boards that use it.
We need to handle custom board too.

>> - for bones with the same pinout:
>> - the pins are routed to different function blocks on the
>> SOC because different bones may have different SOCs?
>> - the different functional blocks are compatible or not?
>
> This is the general case, there will be a substantial level of
> compatibility between different base boards by virtue of the pinouts
> being the same but obviously there will be some variation in the
> specifics (and even where that exists it may not be enough to be visible
> at the DT level for the most part). That said there will doubtless be
> some plug in modules that want to rely on the specifics of a given base
> board rather than remain compatible with general users of the interface.

Even for plug in modules that need a specific board it is typical that new
SoCs/boards appear in the future that are backwards compatible.

Regards

— Pantelis

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-07-05 20:41    [W:0.096 / U:23.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site