[PATCH v2 1/5] ARM: bcm476x: Add platform infrastructure

On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 01:48:01PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

On Sunday 14 October 2012, Domenico Andreoli wrote:

quoted

From: Domenico Andreoli <redacted>

Platform infrastructure for the Broadcom BCM476x ARMv6 SoCs.

Hi Domenico,

Hi Arnd,

All your patches look good to me now, except for one thing throughout
the bindings:

quoted

Index: b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm476x.txt
===================================================================

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm476x.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+Broadcom BCM4760 and BCM4761 SoCs device tree bindings
+------------------------------------------------------
+
+Boards with the BCM4760 SoC shall have the following properties:
+
+Required root node property:
+
+compatible = "brcm,bcm4760";
+
+
+Boards with the BCM4761 SoC shall have the following properties:
+
+Required root node property:
+
+compatible = "brcm,bcm4761";

I probably wasn't clear enough with my request to have specific
chip identifiers in the device tree "compatible" nodes. The idea
generally is that for completely identical hardware blocks, you
just need to put the first known variant into the driver, e.g.
"brcm,bcm4760-system-timer", and in case of a later chip that
is compatible with it, you list both "brcm,bcm4760-system-timer"
and "brcm,bcm4761-system-timer" in the compatible property of the
device tree. The way you did it is also correct and works, but
is a bit less common.

How do you want to merge your patches? The preferred way from
our side is to get a pull request from you sent to arm at kernel.org
with Cc to the linux-arm-kernel mailing list, but we can also
pick up the patches separately if necessary.

so the above becomes:

Index: b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm476x.txt
===================================================================

--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/bcm476x.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+Broadcom BCM4760 and BCM4761 SoCs device tree bindings
+------------------------------------------------------
+
+Boards with the BCM4760 SoC shall have the following properties:
+
+Required root node property:
+
+compatible = "brcm,bcm4760";
+
+
+Boards with the BCM4761 SoC shall have the following properties:
+
+Required root node property:
+
+compatible = "brcm,bcm4760", "brcm,bcm4761";

and the dt_mach in the board file is left only with "brcm,bcm4760" until
required otherwise. The same applies to drivers.

Does the order matter? 

For the patches that go into different directories like the clk
and the clocksource drivers, please Cc the respective subsystem
maintainers and ask them for an Ack. It certainly makes sense
for a new platform port to get merged through the arm-soc tree,
but any future improvements should normally just go through the
subsystem trees.

I'd prefer patches but only because I've not any public git repository. If
the git pull is much more preferred, I surely can manage it.

Thanks,
Domenico