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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: dts: stm32: add STM32MP1-based Linux Automation
 MC-1 board
To:     Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
        <linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
CC:     <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20200226143826.1146-1-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
 <20200226143826.1146-2-a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
 <244a4502-03e0-836c-2ce2-7fa6cef3c188@st.com>
 <fbba971d7501c774ce0081f22dcff4ef74002a4d.camel@pengutronix.de>
From:   Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>
Message-ID: <e227de9a-7440-7e1f-2928-5648cbbe44c1@st.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Mar 2020 11:29:28 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <fbba971d7501c774ce0081f22dcff4ef74002a4d.camel@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Lucas

On 3/2/20 11:18 AM, Lucas Stach wrote:
> On Mo, 2020-03-02 at 11:06 +0100, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>> Hi Ahmad
>>
>> Thanks for adding a new STM32 board. Some minor comments.
>>
>> On 2/26/20 3:38 PM, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
>>> The Linux Automation MC-1 is a SBC built around the Octavo Systems
>>> OSD32MP15x SiP. The SiP features up to 1 GB DDR3 RAM, EEPROM and
>>> a PMIC. The board has eMMC and a SD slot for storage and GbE
>>> for both connectivity and power.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de
>>> ---
> [...]
>>> +
>>> +&gpu {
>>> +	status = "okay";
>>> +};
> 
> This question is more to the ST guys than this specific DT: Why is the
> GPU marked as disabled in the SoC dtsi file? This device is always
> present on the SoC and AFAICS there are no board level dependencies, so
> there is no reason to have it disabled by default, right? Removing the
> status property from the dtsi would remove the need for this override
> on the board DT.

You are right. With new stm32 device tree diversity, it makes no longer 
sens to disable GPU node in stm32mp157 dtsi file. Indeed, we use now 
dedicated files for each SoC (stm32mp151 / stm32mp153 /stm32mp157).

Ahmad, can you add this modification in your series please ?

regards
Alex


> 
> Regards,
> Lucas
>