On 18.10.2016 09:28, Oscar Gomez Fuente wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> In my opinion, use the picozed without a carrier board it doesn't make
> sense. You always are going to need a carrier board. Avnet has two models
> the PicoZed FMC Carrier V2 and the PicoZed FMC Carrier V1. And the company
> I'm working, it is going to desing a custom carrier board according to our
> So maybe, it's better to have only two .dts files. zynq-picozed-fmc-v2.dts
> and zynq-picozed-fmc-v1.dts.
> If we decide to have the zynq-picozed.dtsi and zynq-picozed-fmc-v2.dts,
> we'll have to decide what hardware description is going to be in the
> zynq-picozed-fmc-v2.dts and what hardware description is going to be
> in zynq-picozed.dtsi.
> for example the spi0 hw is in the picozed board, but the SD (mmc0), eth0
> (gem0) and serial0 (uart1) the HW is in the picoZed but the connectors are
> in the PicoZed FMC Carrier V2, so It's a little bit confused if this HW
> description has to be on the zynq-picozed.dtsi file or in the
> zynq-picozed-fmc-v2.dts file. Do you know what I mean?
> Please let me see you opinions about that.
I understand your concern. These SOMs are problematic and it is up2you
how you want to do it. My preference would be to add common stuff to
dtsi file and carried board stuff to dts file. If that configurations
have nothing in common then using just fmc dts is fine for me.
When ps7_init.* files are in place it should be visible how MIOs are
U-Boot mailing list