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.
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.
Thanks, Mani
Thanks!
Ezequiel García, VanguardiaSur www.vanguardiasur.com.ar