lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM: dts: imx6ul-kontron-ul2: Add Exceet/Kontron iMX6-UL2 SoM
On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 at 17:21, Schrempf Frieder
<frieder.schrempf@kontron.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> On 12.07.19 16:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > Add support for iMX6-UL2 modules from Kontron Electronics GmbH (before
> > acquisition: Exceet Electronics) and evalkit boards based on it:
> >
> > 1. i.MX6 UL System-on-Module, a 25x25 mm solderable module (LGA pads and
> > pin castellations) with 256 MB RAM, 1 MB NOR-Flash, 256 MB NAND and
> > other interfaces,
> > 1. UL2 evalkit, w/wo eMMC, without display,
> > 2. UL2 evalkit with 4.3" display,
> > 3. UL2 evalkit with 5.0" display.
> >
> > This includes device nodes for unsupported displays (Admatec
> > T043C004800272T2A and T070P133T0S301).
> >
> > The work is based on Exceet source code (GPLv2) with numerous changes:
> > 1. Reorganize files,
> > 2. Rename Exceet -> Kontron,
> > 3. Fix coding style errors,
> > 4. Fix DTC warnings,
> > 5. Extend compatibles so eval boards inherit the SoM compatible,
> > 6. Use defines instead of GPIO flag values,
> > 7. Adjust operating points of CPU0,
> > 8. Sort nodes alphabetically.
> >
> > In downstream BSP the Exceet name still appears in multiple places
> > therefore I left it in the model names.
>
> First, thanks for your work. I planned to upstream these boards myself
> after the FSL QSPI spi-mem driver was merged in 5.1, but didn't have
> time to finalize and send the patches.
>
> Meanwhile we came up with a new naming scheme for our boards, that
> hasn't been implemented yet. But I would like to take this chance to
> implement the new scheme.

Sure, I see no problem in using different names, matching downstream
kernel. Just point me to proper names.

> Also there are some more flavors of the SoM (with i.MX6ULL instead of
> i.MX6UL, with 512MiB instead of 256MiB flash/RAM), that I would like to
> add and for which common parts of the SoM dtsi would need to be factored
> out to a separate file.

I have only this one particular flavor so I would prefer to upstream
only this one. I do not know all the possible combinations or for
example the most interesting ones. I think after this patchset we can
refactor the DTS whenever its needed - split common parts, add new
files.

> I would prefer to at least apply the naming changes before merging. The
> additional board flavors could be added before merging or I could send
> them as follow-up patches. What do you think?

Let's change the naming and add new flavors as follow ups?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-16 09:51    [W:0.072 / U:0.476 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site