On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 04:51:05PM +0800, Yangyu Chen wrote:
> On 2024/3/4 16:11, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 03/03/2024 14:26, Yangyu Chen wrote:
> > > Since K230 was released, K210 is no longer the only SoC in the Kendryte
> > > series, so remove the K210 string from the description. Also, add two
> > > boards based on k230 to compatible strings to allow them to be used in the
> > > dt.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yangyu Chen <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/canaan.yaml | 13 ++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/canaan.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/canaan.yaml
> > > index 41fd11f70a49..444758db964e 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/canaan.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/canaan.yaml
> > > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ maintainers:
> > > - Damien Le Moal <[email protected]>
> > > description:
> > > - Canaan Kendryte K210 SoC-based boards
> > > + Canaan Kendryte SoC-based boards
> > > properties:
> > > $nodename:
> > > @@ -42,6 +42,17 @@ properties:
> > > - items:
> > > - const: canaan,kendryte-k210
> > > + - items:
> > > + - const: canaan,k230-usip-lp3-evb
> > > + - const: canaan,kendryte-k230
> > > +
> > > + - items:
> > > + - const: canaan,canmv-k230
> >
> > Why this is not part of previous entry in an enum?
> >
> > > + - const: canaan,kendryte-k230
> > > +
> > > + - items:
> > > + - const: canaan,kendryte-k230
> >
> > Usually you cannot run SoCs alone. What does it represent (in real life)?
> >
>
> I'm not sure what it means.
You have a SoC compatible but no board compatible. You cannot run a SoC
without some sort of board connected to it, so this should be removed.
> If you wonder why should I add a compatible string for soc, that is although
> we cannot run SoCs alone, adding a soc compatible will allow some
> bootloaders or SBI on RISC-V to choose an errata for a soc. Such as this
> opensbi patch. [1]
You don't need to add an isolated compatible like this to be able to
apply that "erratum", the compatible is already documented from the
"usip-l3-evb" and "canmv-k230" entries.
> If you wonder why I should allow a soc-compatible string with soc alone,
> that is because k210 did it previously.
The k210 is not really a beacon of quality in the DT department, copying
from there is likely to be misleading unfortunately.
> And provide a k210_generic.dts to
> use it. I haven't provided generic dts now but allowing only soc-compatible
> string alone would also be acceptable I think.
To be honest, I would like to delete the generic dts for the k210, I
don't think it should exist, at least not in the current form.
Thanks,
Conor.