Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Frank Rowand]

On 1/28/2016 6:43 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
>  wrote:
>> Hi Olof,
>>
>> On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Suravee,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
>>>  wrote:

 From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

 This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
 files.
 It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
 (Husky)
 platforms.
>>>
>>>
>>> My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
>>> have a in-kernel-tree DT source.
>>
>>
>> You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
>> need this.
>>
>>> Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
>>> divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
>>> this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
>>> we had in the kernel tree.
>>
>>
>> However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
>> requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
>> get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.
> 
> Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
> contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
> binding was updated.
> 
> It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
> booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
> user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.
> 
> (The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
> the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).
> 
>> Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
>> So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
>> updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
>> in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
>> conflicts.
> 
> I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
> provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
> wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
> overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
> already be somewhat familiar with. :)
> 
> I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
> understanding of why it's considered needed.
> 
> 
> -Olof

I would strongly encourage the inclusion of the dts file in the kernel
source tree, even if the dtb is delivered with the firmware for several
reasons.

The dts provides a reference for other developers who are supporting new
boards that are similar.

The dts might be reviewed.

We hope to have tools that will validate the dts against the documented
bindings.  (Yes, this effort has stalled, but I am optimistic that it
is not dead.)

If someone has the board (any board, not just this one) that the kernel
does not boot on, then it might not be possible to retrieve the dtb
from the board (which can then be de-compiled to a dts) for the
purpose of debugging or properly configuring the kernel.  (The boot
loader may provide the ability to get the dtb or it might not.)

-Frank

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulanit]

On 1/28/2016 8:43 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
 wrote:

Hi Olof,

On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:


Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:


From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
(Husky)
platforms.



My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.



You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
need this.


Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.



However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.


Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
binding was updated.

It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.

(The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).


Ok. I understand your point that driver will not break the existing DT. :)


Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
conflicts.


I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
already be somewhat familiar with. :)


Agree. This is true in the x86 world where things are mostly stable.

However, in the ARM64 cases, there are still newer supports being added. 
Often that I have been asked by folks to provide a base DT that they can 
extend (e.g. to add support for platform device pass-through, PCI 
pass-through, SBSA GWDT, etc). Eventually, this in-kernel DT would not 
be needed as the more stable DT would have already been in the later 
version of the FW. But in the meantime, it seems useful to have this in 
one accessible place.


Thanks,
Suravee


I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
understanding of why it's considered needed.


-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Frank Rowand]

On 1/28/2016 6:43 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
>  wrote:
>> Hi Olof,
>>
>> On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Suravee,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
>>>  wrote:

 From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

 This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
 files.
 It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
 (Husky)
 platforms.
>>>
>>>
>>> My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
>>> have a in-kernel-tree DT source.
>>
>>
>> You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
>> need this.
>>
>>> Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
>>> divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
>>> this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
>>> we had in the kernel tree.
>>
>>
>> However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
>> requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
>> get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.
> 
> Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
> contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
> binding was updated.
> 
> It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
> booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
> user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.
> 
> (The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
> the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).
> 
>> Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
>> So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
>> updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
>> in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
>> conflicts.
> 
> I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
> provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
> wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
> overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
> already be somewhat familiar with. :)
> 
> I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
> understanding of why it's considered needed.
> 
> 
> -Olof

I would strongly encourage the inclusion of the dts file in the kernel
source tree, even if the dtb is delivered with the firmware for several
reasons.

The dts provides a reference for other developers who are supporting new
boards that are similar.

The dts might be reviewed.

We hope to have tools that will validate the dts against the documented
bindings.  (Yes, this effort has stalled, but I am optimistic that it
is not dead.)

If someone has the board (any board, not just this one) that the kernel
does not boot on, then it might not be possible to retrieve the dtb
from the board (which can then be de-compiled to a dts) for the
purpose of debugging or properly configuring the kernel.  (The boot
loader may provide the ability to get the dtb or it might not.)

-Frank

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulanit]

On 1/28/2016 8:43 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
 wrote:

Hi Olof,

On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:


Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:


From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
(Husky)
platforms.



My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.



You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
need this.


Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.



However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.


Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
binding was updated.

It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.

(The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).


Ok. I understand your point that driver will not break the existing DT. :)


Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
conflicts.


I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
already be somewhat familiar with. :)


Agree. This is true in the x86 world where things are mostly stable.

However, in the ARM64 cases, there are still newer supports being added. 
Often that I have been asked by folks to provide a base DT that they can 
extend (e.g. to add support for platform device pass-through, PCI 
pass-through, SBSA GWDT, etc). Eventually, this in-kernel DT would not 
be needed as the more stable DT would have already been in the later 
version of the FW. But in the meantime, it seems useful to have this in 
one accessible place.


Thanks,
Suravee


I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
understanding of why it's considered needed.


-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Olof Johansson]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
 wrote:
> Hi Olof,
>
> On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>
>> Hi Suravee,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 
>>>
>>> This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
>>> files.
>>> It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
>>> (Husky)
>>> platforms.
>>
>>
>> My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
>> have a in-kernel-tree DT source.
>
>
> You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
> need this.
>
>> Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
>> divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
>> this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
>> we had in the kernel tree.
>
>
> However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
> requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
> get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.

Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
binding was updated.

It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.

(The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).

> Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
> So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
> updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
> in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
> conflicts.

I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
already be somewhat familiar with. :)

I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
understanding of why it's considered needed.


-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulanit]

Hi Olof,

On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:

From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
platforms.


My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.


You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you 
wouldn't need this.



Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.


However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and 
sometimes requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with 
the FW can get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.


Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the 
FW. So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide 
the updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing 
the in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid 
potential conflicts.


Regards,
Suravee



-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Olof Johansson]

Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:
> From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 
>
> This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
> It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
> platforms.

My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.

Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.


-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulanit]

Hi Olof,

On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:

Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:

From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
platforms.


My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.


You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you 
wouldn't need this.



Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.


However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and 
sometimes requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with 
the FW can get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.


Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the 
FW. So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide 
the updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing 
the in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid 
potential conflicts.


Regards,
Suravee



-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Olof Johansson]

Hi Suravee,

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
 wrote:
> From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 
>
> This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
> It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
> platforms.

My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
have a in-kernel-tree DT source.

Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
we had in the kernel tree.


-Olof

Re: [PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Olof Johansson]

On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Suravee Suthikulanit
 wrote:
> Hi Olof,
>
> On 1/28/2016 3:39 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>
>> Hi Suravee,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 
>>>
>>> This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS
>>> files.
>>> It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards
>>> (Husky)
>>> platforms.
>>
>>
>> My Overdrive comes with DT provided by firmware, so there's no need to
>> have a in-kernel-tree DT source.
>
>
> You are correct that the FW comes with DT, and in typical case, you wouldn't
> need this.
>
>> Are you aware of other reasons to have it here? I just foresee
>> divergence and conflicts between the two. It was quite obvious before
>> this update when the FW-provided DT was a lot more complete than what
>> we had in the kernel tree.
>
>
> However, there are still new/updated drivers being developed, and sometimes
> requires new/changes in DT binding. So, the DT that comes with the FW can
> get out of date, and will lack the support for new drivers.

Note that it's expected that the driver will cope with the old DT
contents, i.e. it needs to go with defaults that made sense before the
binding was updated.

It, however, doesn't have to enable new features. In other words,
booting with an old DT needs to continue working. You can't require a
user to update DT to avoid getting driver breakage.

(The opposite is not enforced: Booting with a DT that is newer than
the kernel isn't guaranteed to always work).

> Certain version of the FW allows overriding the DT that comes with the FW.
> So, we are providing the in-kernel DT to allow developers to provide the
> updated device tree for newer kernels. This patch series is bringing the
> in-kernel DT closer to what the latest FW is providing to avoid potential
> conflicts.

I do appreciate keeping the kernel one up to date with what firmware
provides if it's truly needed, but I'd even more prefer that it
wasn't. After all, it's how the ACPI-based booting works (no
overriding table provided with the kernel), so it's a model you should
already be somewhat familiar with. :)

I'm not doing a hard NAK on this, but I would like to get a bit more
understanding of why it's considered needed.


-Olof

[PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulpanit]

From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
platforms.

Thanks,
Suravee

Brijesh Singh (2):
  dtb: amd: Fix GICv2 hypervisor and virtual interface sizes
  dtb: amd: Add KCS device tree node

Suravee Suthikulpanit (10):
  MAINTAINERS: Adding Maintainers for AMD Seattle Device Tree
  dtb: amd: Fix DMA ranges in device tree
  dtb: amd: Fix typo in SPI device nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for I2C device nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for SATA device tree nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for GPIO devices
  dtb: amd: Add PERF CCN-504 device tree node
  dtb: amd: Add PCIe SMMU device tree node
  dtb: amd: Add support for new AMD Overdrive boards
  dtb: amd: Add support for AMD/Linaro 96Boards Enterprise Edition
Server board

Tom Lendacky (1):
  dtb: amd: Add AMD XGBE device tree file

 MAINTAINERS  |   9 ++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/Makefile |   4 +-
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b0.dts |  87 +++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b1.dts |  91 
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-soc.dtsi | 128 ---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-xgbe-b.dtsi  | 117 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/husky.dts|  83 +++
 7 files changed, 505 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b0.dts
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b1.dts
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-xgbe-b.dtsi
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/husky.dts

-- 
2.5.0

[PATCH 00/13] dtb: amd: Miscelleneous Updates for AMD Seattle DTS

[Suravee Suthikulpanit]

From: Suravee Suthikulpanit 

This patch series contains several updates for the AMD Seattle SOC DTS files.
It also adds new board files for newer Overdrive and Linaro 96boards (Husky)
platforms.

Thanks,
Suravee

Brijesh Singh (2):
  dtb: amd: Fix GICv2 hypervisor and virtual interface sizes
  dtb: amd: Add KCS device tree node

Suravee Suthikulpanit (10):
  MAINTAINERS: Adding Maintainers for AMD Seattle Device Tree
  dtb: amd: Fix DMA ranges in device tree
  dtb: amd: Fix typo in SPI device nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for I2C device nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for SATA device tree nodes
  dtb: amd: Misc changes for GPIO devices
  dtb: amd: Add PERF CCN-504 device tree node
  dtb: amd: Add PCIe SMMU device tree node
  dtb: amd: Add support for new AMD Overdrive boards
  dtb: amd: Add support for AMD/Linaro 96Boards Enterprise Edition
Server board

Tom Lendacky (1):
  dtb: amd: Add AMD XGBE device tree file

 MAINTAINERS  |   9 ++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/Makefile |   4 +-
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b0.dts |  87 +++
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b1.dts |  91 
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-soc.dtsi | 128 ---
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-xgbe-b.dtsi  | 117 +
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/husky.dts|  83 +++
 7 files changed, 505 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b0.dts
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-overdrive-rev-b1.dts
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/amd-seattle-xgbe-b.dtsi
 create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/amd/husky.dts

-- 
2.5.0