| Message ID | 20210304153257.4059277-1-geert+renesas@glider.be (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64: dts: renesas: falcon: Add I2C EEPROMs and sub-boards | expand |
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 04:32:54PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch series adds the device nodes for all I2C EEPROMs in the > Falcon board stack. As some EEPROMs are located on sub-boards, > it also introduces individual .dtsi files for these sub-boards. > Note that (for now) these sub-boards don't have compatible values or > model strings, as I think this needs more discussion. > > This has been tested on the Falcon boards in Magnus' and Kieran's farms. > The EEPROM on the CPU board in Magnus' farm contains some data. > All other EEPROMs are present, but in pristine state (all ones). > > Changes compared to v1: > - Move EEPROMs in sub-boards to separate .dtsi files and patches. > Checked the datasheets and tested, too, so: Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Tested-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> One minor question is: why do the labels in patches 2+3 have the "-id" suffix and patch 1 does not? Don't we want consistency here?
Hi Wolfram, On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 3:15 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 04:32:54PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > This patch series adds the device nodes for all I2C EEPROMs in the > > Falcon board stack. As some EEPROMs are located on sub-boards, > > it also introduces individual .dtsi files for these sub-boards. > > Note that (for now) these sub-boards don't have compatible values or > > model strings, as I think this needs more discussion. > > > > This has been tested on the Falcon boards in Magnus' and Kieran's farms. > > The EEPROM on the CPU board in Magnus' farm contains some data. > > All other EEPROMs are present, but in pristine state (all ones). > > > > Changes compared to v1: > > - Move EEPROMs in sub-boards to separate .dtsi files and patches. > > > > Checked the datasheets and tested, too, so: > > Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> > Tested-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Thanks! > One minor question is: why do the labels in patches 2+3 have the "-id" > suffix and patch 1 does not? Don't we want consistency here? The EEPROMs on the sub-boards are labeled "Board ID" in the schematics, the EEPROMs on the CPU and BreakOut board aren't. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
> > One minor question is: why do the labels in patches 2+3 have the "-id" > > suffix and patch 1 does not? Don't we want consistency here? > > The EEPROMs on the sub-boards are labeled "Board ID" in the > schematics, the EEPROMs on the CPU and BreakOut board aren't. OK, super fine with me.