From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754527AbcGEIdn (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2016 04:33:43 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:44294 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751886AbcGEIcp (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2016 04:32:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 10:31:52 +0200 From: Mark Brown To: Frank Rowand Cc: Pantelis Antoniou , Rob Herring , david@gibson.dropbear.id.au, stephen.boyd@linaro.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, Mark Rutland , mporter@konsulko.com, Koen Kooi , Guenter Roeck , marex@denx.de, Wolfram Sang , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, panto@antoniou-consulting.com Message-ID: <20160705083152.GM6247@sirena.org.uk> References: <577ACE0D.9050700@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="16g62bNiOXHZyjZa" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <577ACE0D.9050700@gmail.com> X-Cookie: You are always busy. User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 137.158.22.87 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: portable device tree connector -- problem statement X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --16g62bNiOXHZyjZa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 01:58:53PM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote: > On the other hand, I have no previous detailed knowledge of the beagle > family. This is in no way specific to the BeagleBones, there's plenty of other boards out there with similar setups like the Raspberry Pi and its derivatives. =20 > - for bones with the same pinout: > - the pins are routed to different function blocks on the > SOC because different bones may have different SOCs? > - the different functional blocks are compatible or not? This is the general case, there will be a substantial level of compatibility between different base boards by virtue of the pinouts being the same but obviously there will be some variation in the specifics (and even where that exists it may not be enough to be visible at the DT level for the most part). That said there will doubtless be some plug in modules that want to rely on the specifics of a given base board rather than remain compatible with general users of the interface. --16g62bNiOXHZyjZa Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXe3B2AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ+e0H/2kaN1DHfEa1BPMPmuMRjtnt WHbX7eA28turg1rpwW+yQazaMTyQre8rBo4TC1jCNaABnxeK3tcUJA7XkcrQRhJ1 Y5zUbq9yDn31wlN2G1DaSLSEGN1I/yr3EGRReEh3IQjMBI5Bq5VHlX5myG3UDeNy syuwh8mINgdSmImdYJ7QZZoZ7RH7/Y1I3+Tx1lUVeAYsJah5Sg9I4bCs2LCYTWME VCwH5ZMIbekhHasvADV4baHVLP1yxlf2HA/4O9m6/Xu239jQ47l2OwKbQpE+S2Pd o57A4ynxJXklteDvKEVFwSyD6Fe9eaPuzN6Yxw1aONWmKvqre/dr1R73bcRBdJs= =VMg8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --16g62bNiOXHZyjZa--