On 14:45-20230418, Manorit Chawdhry wrote:
Hi Nishanth,
On 14/04/23 13:27, Nishanth Menon wrote:
Use am642-sk.dts to represent the Board and selectively enable/override the configurations necessary. And since am642-sk-u-boot.dtsi also needs to setup common properties, instead of re-inventing everything, just reuse the definitions.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon nm@ti.com
arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-sk.dts | 194 +++----------------------------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 176 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-sk.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-sk.dts index 9ff4dd3dd365..8ac6cc77256c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-sk.dts +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-r5-sk.dts @@ -5,31 +5,18 @@ /dts-v1/; -#include <dt-bindings/mux/ti-serdes.h> -#include <dt-bindings/phy/phy.h> -#include <dt-bindings/net/ti-dp83867.h> -#include "k3-am642.dtsi" +#include "k3-am642-sk.dts" #include "k3-am64-sk-lp4-1600MTs.dtsi" #include "k3-am64-ddr.dtsi" -/ {
- chosen {
stdout-path = "serial2:115200n8";tick-timer = &timer1;- };
+#include "k3-am642-sk-u-boot.dtsi"
would changing the location of the include affect the dt nodes somehow?
yes, ofcourse, depends on the overlap ofcourse, in this series, I have tried to ensure the overlap occurs only where necessary. board.dts: &node { property-x = <0>; };
board-u-boot.dts: &node { property-x = <1>; };
board-r5.dts: &node { property-x = <2>; };
Then: case a) u-boot.dtsi included in r5.dts at the very end will make the property 1! - but then what was the point in overriding node?
case b) u-boot.dtsi included early in r5.dts will make the property 2 - which was intended when we introduced the override.
Are you seeing a specific problem in this series?