Message ID | cover.1733156661.git.geert+renesas@glider.be (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | arm64: renesas: Add R8A779G3 White Hawk Single support | expand |
Hi Geert > This patch series adds support for the Renesas R-Car V4H ES3.0 (R8A779G3) > SoC on the Renesas White Hawk Single board. R-Car V4H ES3.0 (R8A779G3) > is an updated version of R-Car V4H (R8A779G0). > > I intend to queue these in renesas-devel for v6.14. > Thanks for your comments! Thank you for the patch-set. For all patches Reviewed-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> But small nitpick is that R8A779G2 is not only for ES2.0 but for ES2.x Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
Hi Morimoto-san, On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 1:56 AM Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > > This patch series adds support for the Renesas R-Car V4H ES3.0 (R8A779G3) > > SoC on the Renesas White Hawk Single board. R-Car V4H ES3.0 (R8A779G3) > > is an updated version of R-Car V4H (R8A779G0). > > > > I intend to queue these in renesas-devel for v6.14. > > Thanks for your comments! > > Thank you for the patch-set. For all patches > > Reviewed-by: Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> > > But small nitpick is that R8A779G2 is not only for ES2.0 but for ES2.x I didn't add any occurrences of "ES2.0" in this series ;-) I did consider adding comments to the SoC-specific compatible values in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/renesas/renesas.yaml - - renesas,r8a779g2 - - renesas,r8a779g3 + - renesas,r8a779g2 # ES2.x + - renesas,r8a779g3 # ES3.0 but decided against doing so, as "ES3.0" would become stale as soon as Renesas releases "ES3.1". Alternatively, I could use "ES3.x" immediately. What do you think? Thanks! Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
Hi Geert > > But small nitpick is that R8A779G2 is not only for ES2.0 but for ES2.x > > I didn't add any occurrences of "ES2.0" in this series ;-) Almost, but we can see ;P [PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a779g3: Add White Hawk Single support ... For now, there are no visible differences compared to the variant => equipped with an R-Car V4H ES2.0 (R8A779G2) SoC. > - - renesas,r8a779g2 > - - renesas,r8a779g3 > + - renesas,r8a779g2 # ES2.x > + - renesas,r8a779g3 # ES3.0 > > but decided against doing so, as "ES3.0" would become stale as soon > as Renesas releases "ES3.1". Alternatively, I could use "ES3.x" > immediately. Yeah, maybe, but will check. Please wait. Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
Hi Geert, again > > - - renesas,r8a779g2 > > - - renesas,r8a779g3 > > + - renesas,r8a779g2 # ES2.x > > + - renesas,r8a779g3 # ES3.0 > > > > but decided against doing so, as "ES3.0" would become stale as soon > > as Renesas releases "ES3.1". Alternatively, I could use "ES3.x" > > immediately. It seems using "ES3.x" is a good idea. Thank you for your help !! Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto
Hi Morimoto-san, On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 8:00 AM Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> wrote: > > > - - renesas,r8a779g2 > > > - - renesas,r8a779g3 > > > + - renesas,r8a779g2 # ES2.x > > > + - renesas,r8a779g3 # ES3.0 > > > > > > but decided against doing so, as "ES3.0" would become stale as soon > > > as Renesas releases "ES3.1". Alternatively, I could use "ES3.x" > > > immediately. > > It seems using "ES3.x" is a good idea. Thanks for checking, I'll add these comments while applying. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert