Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190423091503.10847-1-narmstrong@baylibre.com> <20190423091503.10847-7-narmstrong@baylibre.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190423091503.10847-7-narmstrong@baylibre.com>
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Date:   Sat, 27 Apr 2019 22:26:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CAFBinCDOGyP5pwcmV_4ZjhY4hiBaTesrgfEMyQ6yfx+T0Uo1hg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] arm64: dts: meson: Add minimal support for Odroid-N2
To:     Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
Cc:     khilman@baylibre.com, jbrunet@baylibre.com,
        linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Neil,

On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 11:16 AM Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com> wrote:
>
> This patch adds basic support for :
> - Amlogic G12B, which is very similar to G12A
> - The HardKernel Odroid-N2 based on the S922X SoC
>
> The Amlogic G12B SoC is very similar with the G12A SoC, sharing
> most of the features and architecture, but with these differences :
> - The first CPU cluster only has 2xCortex-A53 instead of 4
> - G12B has a second cluster of 4xCortex-A73
> - Both cluster can achieve 2GHz instead of 1,8GHz for G12A
> - CPU Clock architecture is difference, thus needing a different
>   compatible to handle this slight difference
> - Supports a MIPI CSI input
> - Embeds a Mali-G52 instead of a Mali-G31, but integration is the same
>
> Actual support is done in the same way as for the GXM support, including
> the G12A dtsi and redefining the CPU clusters.
> Unlike GXM, the first cluster is different, thus needing to remove
> the last 2 cpu nodes of the first cluster.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com>
I don't have the board myself so I can't test it. However, apart from
one comment below this is looking good so:
Reviewed-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>

[...]
> +&usb {
> +       status = "okay";
> +};
> +
> +&usb2_phy0 {
> +       phy-supply = <&usb_pwr_en>;
> +};
is usb_pwr_en really the phy-supply or is it the vbus-supply of the
USB top control block (&usb node)?


Martin