-----Original Message-----
From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak at codeaurora.org]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 9:41 AM
To: Sharma Bhupesh-B45370
Cc: arnd at arndb.de; Catalin.Marinas at arm.com; devicetree-
discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; Will.Deacon at arm.com; Yoder Stuart-B08248;
grant.likely at secretlab.ca; Basu Arnab-B45036; linux-arm-
kernel at lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64: Add DTS support for FSL's LS2085A SoC


On Aug 15, 2014, at 9:26 AM, bhupesh.sharma at freescale.com wrote:

quoted

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak at codeaurora.org]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 7:00 PM
To: Sharma Bhupesh-B45370
Cc: devicetree-discuss at lists.ozlabs.org; Catalin.Marinas at arm.com;
arnd at arndb.de; Will.Deacon at arm.com; Yoder Stuart-B08248;
grant.likely at secretlab.ca; Basu Arnab-B45036; linux-arm-
kernel at lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64: Add DTS support for FSL's LS2085A SoC


On Aug 15, 2014, at 4:49 AM, Bhupesh Sharma [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

This patch adds the device tree support for FSL LS2085A SoC based on
ARMv8 architecture.

Following levels of DTSI/DTS files have been created for the LS2085A
SoC family:

- fsl-ls2085a.dtsi:
DTS-Include file for FSL LS2085A SoC.

- fsl-ls2085a-simu.dts:
DTS file for FSL LS2085a software simulator model.

Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Arnab Basu <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <redacted>
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/fsl-ls2085a-simu.dts |   29 ++++++

Hmm, outside of something like qemu, we don't normally have simulation
model dts/support in the kernel.

Well for ARMv8 - foundation model is an existing simulation model having DTS
support.

Regards,
Bhupesh

True but that model was generally available to the open source community and
was to get the base armv8 support going.

Note, the LS2085A SoC definition itself is in fsl-ls2085a.dtsi.  The
fsl-ls2085a-simu is simply a simulation machine that uses that, 
and will generally reflect board-level differences from a physical
machine in things like Ethernet PHYs and so on.  The simulator is
available now to Freescale customers and I expect significant use
by them over the next few years.

If there is a hard rule that 'simulator-based machines are not allowed'
in the kernel, thats fine, but I don't understand why that should be
the case.

Thanks,
Stuart