On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 09:27:25AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
On 31 August 2018 at 09:24, Manivannan Sadhasivam manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 09:08:08AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
On 31 August 2018 at 07:56, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 12:44:00AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
On 30 August 2018 at 00:00, Manivannan Sadhasivam manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org wrote: > Hi Ezequiel, > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 03:11:17AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >> Hi Manivannan, >> >> On 21 August 2018 at 14:09, Manivannan Sadhasivam >> manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org wrote: >> > This patchset adds board support for Vamrs Limited Rock960, >> > which is one of the 96Boards Consumer Edition platform based >> > on Rockchip RK3399 SoC. >> > >> >> What are the differences between this consumer edition board, >> and the enterprise edition (aka Ficus) Vamrs board? >> > > I asked Vamrs about this and they said the difference is very minimal. >
In that case, you should try to leverage the Linux ficus.dts:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch...
If no differences, using the ficus dts should do. If there are differences, we can create a common rock960.dtsi and then enterprise and consumer edition dts.
Okay. Here are the differences between Ficus and Rock960 CE:
- Different host enable GPIO for USB (vcc5v0_host)
- Different power and reset for PCI-E (vcc3v3_pcie, pcie0)
- No Ethernet port on Rock960 (gmac)
So, I would suggest keeping USB, PCI-E and GMAC related nodes on the board specific devicetree and rest on the rk3399-rock960.dtsi. What do you think?
Same applies to Linux also!
Sounds good. If you have some cycles to work on the dts/dtsi split, that would be great.
Sure, will do it for Linux now. Once your u-boot patches gets in, will tackle it also.
Well, I think we can tackle u-boot from scratch. No need to merge my patches if we think they are already wrong :-)
Makes sense!
Yes, I think a rk3399-rock960.dtsi with the differences in two .dts would be great, and even better a single U-Boot which can detect the board and load the right DT, but I do think it should be a separate config to evb as Mani mentioned.
Thanks Peter for your thoughts!
Sounds good too. That'd make board-specific hooks easier.
On the other side, the documentation should be merged somewhere.
Seems nonsense to have a README per board, with more or less the same instructions each time.
This has other side as well. If we continue to merge board specific instructions onto evb-rk3399, it will become messy. So, IMO it's better to have it separate. If you have other ideas, please let me know.
Bootloader wise, there is no such thing as board specific instructions, is it?
Yeah, but I'm thinking about the overhead of having a common doc for boards which might come in future (like Rock960c have an optional eMMC module).
Even in Rock960 CE, we need to specify the load address for u-boot while preparing the uboot.img (not sure why it is required)...
I'm kind of skeptical here.
Peter, any thoughts?
-- Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar