Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-47660-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
Message-ID: <1823c7e3fd460b64c5bab3c1c6623a0a63e073d6.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/21] ARM: dts: aspeed: yosemite4: Add eeprom for
 yosemite4 use
From: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
To: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com>, patrick@stwcx.xyz, Rob
 Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
 Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, 
	linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2024 16:15:39 +1030
In-Reply-To: <20240131084134.328307-12-Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com>
References: <20240131084134.328307-1-Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com>
	 <20240131084134.328307-12-Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0

On Wed, 2024-01-31 at 16:41 +0800, Delphine CC Chiu wrote:
> Add eeprom for yosemite4 use
>=20
> Signed-off-by: Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@wiwynn.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts | 7 ++++++-
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>=20
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts b=
/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts
> index e8d7eb7ff568..f00df378a371 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed/aspeed-bmc-facebook-yosemite4.dts
> @@ -932,7 +932,7 @@ temperature-sensor@4b {
>  	};
> =20
>  	eeprom@54 {
> -		compatible =3D "atmel,24c256";
> +		compatible =3D "atmel,24c128";

This is changing an existing eeprom, not adding a new one - contrary to
the commit message. It probably should be in a separate patch?
Presumably this is also motivated by the change in the schematics? Some
explanation would be helpful.

I'm half wondering whether it would have been easier to add a separate
DTS for the new version of the schematic rather than make all these
piecemeal changes.

Andrew