Hi Geert-san,

Thank you for the patches!

> From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Monday, October 7, 2019 7:23 PM
>       Hi all,
> This RFC patch series adds support for the R-Car M3-W+ (R8A77961) SoC
> and the Salvator-XS board with R-Car M3-W+.  This SoC is a derivative of
> R-Car M3-W (R8A77960), and also known as R-Car M3-W ES3.0.
> As this is an RFC, I'm sending it to a limited audience.
> Based on experience with previous SoCs in the R-Car Gen3 family, the
> following design decisions were made:
>   - Use different compatible values (r8a77961-based),
>   - Use different clock and SYSC DT binding definitions
>     (R8A77961-based), but the same numerical values, to allow sharing
>     drivers,
>   - Share the pin control driver,
>   - Share the clock driver,
>   - Share the system controller driver.
> While the DT ABI is stable (hence we cannot s/r8a7796/r8a77960/ in DTS),
> kernel source code and kernel config symbols can be changed at any
> time.  As changing kernel config symbols impacts the user, they weren't
> renamed yet.
> Questions:
>   - What's the board part number of Salvator-XS with R-Car M3-W+?


>   - Should r8a77961_pinmux_info (and the rename of r8a7796_pinmux_info
>     to r8a77960_pinmux_info) be dropped? I added it because
>     r8a7796_pinmux_info.name contains "r8a77960_pfc".
>   - Should the CLK_R8A77961 and PINCTRL_PFC_R8A77961 symbols be dropped?
>     The clock and pin control drivers are the same or almost the same,
>     so the code increase by always enabling both is minimal.
>   - Should the R8A77961 config symbols be dropped?
>       - CONFIG_ARCH_R8A77961
>       - CONFIG_CLK_R8A77961
>       - CONFIG_PINCTRL_PFC_R8A77961
>       - CONFIG_SYSC_R8A77961

I think the current implementations are OK.

>   - If not, should the R8A7796 config symbols be renamed?
>       - CONFIG_ARCH_R8A7796 to CONFIG_ARCH_R8A77960?
>       - CONFIG_CLK_R8A7796 to CONFIG_CLK_R8A77960?
>       - CONFIG_SYSC_R8A7796 to CONFIG_SYSC_R8A77960?
>     Due to dependencies on CONFIG_ARCH_R8A7796, this should be a single
>     commit.

I think so.

> Related questions for old R-Car H3 ES1.x support:
>   - Should CONFIG_PINCTRL_PFC_R8A77950 be added, to allow compiling out
>     R-Car H3 ES1.x pin control support?
>     If yes, should CONFIG_PINCTRL_PFC_R8A7795 be renamed to

I think the current implementation (CONFIG_PINCTRL_PFC_R8A7795 only) is OK
because the hardware document doesn't mention about R8A77950.

> This patch series is based on renesas-drivers-2019-10-01-v5.4-rc1).  For
> your convenience, it is available in the topic/r8a77961-v1 branch of my
> renesas-drivers git repository at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/geert/renesas-drivers.git.

I reviewed the patch series and seems good to me after updated a few things
(add the board part number and rename R8A7796 to R8A77960). So,

Reviewed-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda...@renesas.com>

And, I tested on the my environment. So,

Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda...@renesas.com>

Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda

Reply via email to