diff mbox series

[v4,01/10] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add bouffalolab

Message ID 20230518152244.2178-2-jszhang@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State Changes Requested
Delegated to: Conor Dooley
Headers show
Series riscv: add Bouffalolab bl808 support | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
conchuod/cover_letter success Series has a cover letter
conchuod/tree_selection success Guessed tree name to be for-next at HEAD ac9a78681b92
conchuod/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
conchuod/maintainers_pattern success MAINTAINERS pattern errors before the patch: 6 and now 6
conchuod/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
conchuod/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
conchuod/build_rv64_clang_allmodconfig success Errors and warnings before: 14 this patch: 14
conchuod/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
conchuod/build_rv64_gcc_allmodconfig success Errors and warnings before: 28 this patch: 28
conchuod/build_rv32_defconfig success Build OK
conchuod/dtb_warn_rv64 success Errors and warnings before: 3 this patch: 3
conchuod/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
conchuod/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 8 lines checked
conchuod/build_rv64_nommu_k210_defconfig success Build OK
conchuod/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
conchuod/build_rv64_nommu_virt_defconfig success Build OK

Commit Message

Jisheng Zhang May 18, 2023, 3:22 p.m. UTC
In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.

Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.

Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Comments

Samuel Holland May 19, 2023, 2:53 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi Jisheng,

Thanks for updating this series!

On 5/18/23 10:22, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
> Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> 
> Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.
> 
> Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
> Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> @@ -200,6 +200,8 @@ patternProperties:
>      description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
>    "^bosch,.*":
>      description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
> +  "^bouffalolab,.*":
> +    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.

Have you thought about using the "bflb" abbreviation as the vendor
prefix, like you use throughout the driver code? This would save quite
some space in the DTB, and seems to be the most common variant seen in
the vendor SDK:

bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bflb | wc -l
14364
bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalo | wc -l
1042
bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalolab | wc -l
179

So that is what we were using for bringing up Linux and U-Boot over at
https://github.com/openbouffalo.

On the other hand, "bouffalolab" is certainly accurate as well, so I
understand if you prefer it. And we will of course adapt to whatever
gets merged, since our goal is upstreaming.

The vendor code drop[1] provided only one example, "bflb-uart,uart0",
which is not very helpful. Maybe you have received further information
from them?

What do you think?

Regards,
Samuel

[1]:
https://github.com/bouffalolab/bl808_linux/blob/main/linux-5.10.4-808/drivers/tty/serial/bflb_uart.c#L700
Jisheng Zhang May 21, 2023, 9:02 a.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:53:12PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> Hi Jisheng,
> 
> Thanks for updating this series!
> 
> On 5/18/23 10:22, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
> > Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > 
> > Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.
> > 
> > Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > @@ -200,6 +200,8 @@ patternProperties:
> >      description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
> >    "^bosch,.*":
> >      description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
> > +  "^bouffalolab,.*":
> > +    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> 
> Have you thought about using the "bflb" abbreviation as the vendor

I did think about bflb vs bouffalolab. Here is what I thought: I came
across "marvell" vs "mrvl" sevral years ago, I got an impression
"marvell" vendor prefix is preferred if I read the discussions
correctly.

As for Bouffalolab vendor prefix, I have no preference, maybe DT
maintainers can provide inputs here.
Rob, Conor, Krzysztof, what's your opinion?

Thanks

> prefix, like you use throughout the driver code? This would save quite
> some space in the DTB, and seems to be the most common variant seen in
> the vendor SDK:
> 
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bflb | wc -l
> 14364
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalo | wc -l
> 1042
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalolab | wc -l
> 179
> 
> So that is what we were using for bringing up Linux and U-Boot over at
> https://github.com/openbouffalo.
> 
> On the other hand, "bouffalolab" is certainly accurate as well, so I
> understand if you prefer it. And we will of course adapt to whatever
> gets merged, since our goal is upstreaming.
> 
> The vendor code drop[1] provided only one example, "bflb-uart,uart0",
> which is not very helpful. Maybe you have received further information
> from them?
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Regards,
> Samuel
> 
> [1]:
> https://github.com/bouffalolab/bl808_linux/blob/main/linux-5.10.4-808/drivers/tty/serial/bflb_uart.c#L700
>
Conor Dooley May 21, 2023, 1:55 p.m. UTC | #3
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 05:02:23PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:53:12PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > Hi Jisheng,
> > 
> > Thanks for updating this series!
> > 
> > On 5/18/23 10:22, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > > In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
> > > Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > > 
> > > Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.
> > > 
> > > Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
> > > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > @@ -200,6 +200,8 @@ patternProperties:
> > >      description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
> > >    "^bosch,.*":
> > >      description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
> > > +  "^bouffalolab,.*":
> > > +    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > 
> > Have you thought about using the "bflb" abbreviation as the vendor
> 
> I did think about bflb vs bouffalolab. Here is what I thought: I came
> across "marvell" vs "mrvl" sevral years ago, I got an impression
> "marvell" vendor prefix is preferred if I read the discussions
> correctly.
> 
> As for Bouffalolab vendor prefix, I have no preference, maybe DT
> maintainers can provide inputs here.
> Rob, Conor, Krzysztof, what's your opinion?

I had a look through the blame for vendor-prefixes.yaml since I had no
clue how easy it would be to find the marvell discussion - the commit
for gateworks' deprecated entry (done by Krzysztof says "Favor the
longer one (more descriptive)" & I think the same point is valid here.
I would have no idea what "bflb" was if I came across it in isolation!

Cheers,
Conor.
Rob Herring (Arm) June 7, 2023, 7:50 p.m. UTC | #4
On Sun, May 21, 2023 at 05:02:23PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:53:12PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > Hi Jisheng,
> > 
> > Thanks for updating this series!
> > 
> > On 5/18/23 10:22, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > > In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
> > > Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > > 
> > > Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.
> > > 
> > > Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
> > > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> > > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > > @@ -200,6 +200,8 @@ patternProperties:
> > >      description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
> > >    "^bosch,.*":
> > >      description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
> > > +  "^bouffalolab,.*":
> > > +    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > 
> > Have you thought about using the "bflb" abbreviation as the vendor
> 
> I did think about bflb vs bouffalolab. Here is what I thought: I came
> across "marvell" vs "mrvl" sevral years ago, I got an impression
> "marvell" vendor prefix is preferred if I read the discussions
> correctly.
> 
> As for Bouffalolab vendor prefix, I have no preference, maybe DT
> maintainers can provide inputs here.
> Rob, Conor, Krzysztof, what's your opinion?

The general preference is to match the vendor's domain name (minus the 
.com, etc.). Originally, the preference was stock ticker symbol, but 
we've pretty much moved away from that.

So that's 'bouffalolab'.

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>

Rob
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
@@ -200,6 +200,8 @@  patternProperties:
     description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
   "^bosch,.*":
     description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
+  "^bouffalolab,.*":
+    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
   "^boundary,.*":
     description: Boundary Devices Inc.
   "^brcm,.*":