Hi Laurent, Eugeniu, On 06/08/18 11:42, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Eugeniu, > > Thank you for the patch. > > On Sunday, 5 August 2018 02:11:04 EEST Eugeniu Rosca wrote: >> Following the recent change in dt-bindings [1], switch from >> "renesas,h3ulcb" to "renesas,ulcb" compatible string. >> >> [1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/shmobile.txt >> >> Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <[email protected]> >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-es1-ulcb-kf.dts | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-es1-ulcb-kf.dts >> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-es1-ulcb-kf.dts index >> 06deb67c36c8..7a5b1dc64090 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-es1-ulcb-kf.dts >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/renesas/r8a7795-es1-ulcb-kf.dts >> @@ -14,6 +14,6 @@ >> >> / { >> model = "Renesas H3ULCB Kingfisher board based on r8a7795 ES1.x"; >> - compatible = "shimafuji,kingfisher", "renesas,h3ulcb", >> + compatible = "shimafuji,kingfisher", "renesas,ulcb", >> "renesas,r8a7795"; > > This is unrelated to your patch, but due to the reason explained in my review > of 02/14, I think "shimafuji,kingfisher" should include the SoC name. > > This brings up the topic of how to describe boards that are made of an SoC > "module" board plugged into an expansion "motherboard".
Isn't it the point that the shimafuji board is agnostic to the SoC on the ULCB? I presume the Kingfisher board is just the expansion board which would be identical regardless of if it was put on an H3 ULCB, or an M3 ULCB? > >> }; > Regards Kieran
