On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 11:37:20 PM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Marek Vasut marex@denx.de wrote:
On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 05:12:40 PM, Dinh Nguyen wrote:
On 09/01/2015 03:33 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Tuesday, September 01, 2015 at 09:38:23 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Tue 2015-09-01 00:23:49, Marek Vasut wrote:
On Monday, August 31, 2015 at 09:57:05 PM, dinguyen@opensource.altera.com
wrote:
> From: Dinh Nguyen dinguyen@opensource.altera.com > > Add support for the Terasic DE0-Nano/Atlas-SoC Kit, which is a > CycloneV based board. The board can boot from SD/MMC. Ethernet is a > bit different because it has a KSZ9031 PHY, so for now, ethernet > doesn't quite work yet, as a few patches are needed to support the > PHY.
I thought we did support the KSZ9031 PHY. What's the problem ?
> Signed-off-by: Dinh Nguyen dinguyen@opensource.altera.com > --- > Hi Marek, > > This patch is based on your u-boot-socfpga/wip/boards branch.
OK, that makes sense.
> Thanks, > Dinh > --- > > arch/arm/dts/Makefile | 1 + > arch/arm/dts/socfpga_cyclone5_de0_sockit.dts | 61 +++ > arch/arm/mach-socfpga/Kconfig | 7 + > board/terasic/de0/MAINTAINERS | 5 + > board/terasic/de0/Makefile | 9 +
I think it might be clearer to rename it to de0-nano-soc, what do you think ? What's the difference between de0-nano-soc and atlas btw ?
Unless they are going to make "de0-mega".. I'd say "de0" is clean enough.
They already make de0-cv , which is cycloneV SoC based, so de0 is not clear enough, no way. They also make de0-nano , which is cycloneIV based (without soc).
After looking around the site a bit more, I think "de0_nano_sockit" is more appropriate?
It's de0-nano-soc, that's what they call it on that website, right ? SoCkit is a separate board.
Ah yes, it's de0-nano-soc<space>kit. So "de0-nano-soc" ?
Yeah, exactly :)
Best regards, Marek Vasut