On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 01:56:53PM +0000, Hongbo Wang wrote:
quoted
quoted
You will end up with two DT blobs with the same top level
compatible. This is going to cause confusion. I suggest you add an
additional top level compatible to make it clear this differs from
the compatible = "fsl,ls1028a-rdb", "fsl,ls1028a" blob.
Andrew
hi Andrew,
thanks for comments.
this "fsl-ls1028a-rdb-dsa-swp5-eno3.dts" is also for fsl-ls1028a-rdb
platform, the only difference with "fsl-ls1028a-rdb.dts" is that it
use swp5 as dsa master, not swp4, and it's based on
"fsl-ls1028a-rdb.dts", so I choose this manner, if "fsl-ls1028a-rdb.dts" has
some modification for new version, this file don't need be changed.
I tend to agree with Hongbo. What confusion is it going to cause? It is
fundamentally the same board, just an Ethernet port stopped having 'status =
"disabled"' and another changed role, all inside of the SoC with no
externally-visible change. If anything, I think that creating a new top-level
compatible for each small change like this would create a bloat-fest of its own.
I was going to suggest as an alternative to define a device tree overlay file with
the changes in the CPU port assignment, instead of defining a wholly new DTS
for the LS1028A reference design board. But I am pretty sure that it is not
possible to specify a /delete-property/ inside a device tree overlay file, so that
won't actually work.
hi Vladimir,
if don't specify "/delete-property/" in this dts file, the corresponding dtb will not work well,
so I add it to delete 'ethernet' property from mscc_felix_port4 explicitly.
thanks,
hongbo