Re: [PATCH v8 6/6] arm64: dts: allwinner: h5: add support for the Orange Pi PC 2 board

Re: [PATCH v8 6/6] arm64: dts: allwinner: h5: add support for the Orange Pi PC 2 board

[Rask Ingemann Lambertsen]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 01:17:50AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> From: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
> 
> The Orange Pi PC 2 is a typical single board computer using the
> Allwinner H5 SoC. Apart from the usual suspects it features three
> separately driven USB ports and a Gigabit Ethernet port.
> Also it has a SPI NOR flash soldered, from which the board can boot
> from. This enables the SBC to behave like a "real computer" with
> built-in firmware.
> 
> Add the board specific .dts file, which includes the H5 .dtsi and
> enables the peripherals that we support so far.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
> [Icenowy: dropped all GPIO pinctrl nodes, change red LED gpio,
>  change MMC cd to active-low, rename some node names to prevent
>  underscores]
> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@aosc.xyz>

Reviewed-by: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <rask@formelder.dk>

> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..30639729920d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts
> @@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
> +/*
> + * Copyright (C) 2016 ARM Ltd.
> + *
> + * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms
> + * of the GPL or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this dual
> + * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a
> + * whole.

I didn't catch any sort of announcement of it, but it seems as if we've
started using SPDX license identifiers in dts files. Thus you can simply
include the line
SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
after the copyright notice and omit the license notices themselves. Even
though the comment refers to "the X11 license", the license text matches that
associated with the MIT license identifier [1] rather than that of the X11
license [2]. The same goes for patch 5/6.

[1] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html#licenseText
[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html#licenseText

-- 
Rask Ingemann Lambertsen

Re: [PATCH v8 6/6] arm64: dts: allwinner: h5: add support for the Orange Pi PC 2 board

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1659 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 10:49:05PM +0100, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..30639729920d
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h5-orangepi-pc2.dts
> > @@ -0,0 +1,163 @@
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright (C) 2016 ARM Ltd.
> > + *
> > + * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms
> > + * of the GPL or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this dual
> > + * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a
> > + * whole.
> 
> I didn't catch any sort of announcement of it, but it seems as if we've
> started using SPDX license identifiers in dts files. Thus you can simply
> include the line
> SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
> after the copyright notice and omit the license notices themselves. Even
> though the comment refers to "the X11 license", the license text matches that
> associated with the MIT license identifier [1] rather than that of the X11
> license [2]. The same goes for patch 5/6.
> 
> [1] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html#licenseText
> [2] https://spdx.org/licenses/X11.html#licenseText

For my opinion on the matter, see this mail from RMK:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-February/490649.html

If people want to use it, I'm okay with that, but I really don't want
to actively enforce it during the reviews.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v8 0/6] Allwinner H5 and Orange Pi PC2 support

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1160 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 01:17:44AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> Allwinner H5 is a 64-bit SoC with a design like the 32-bit
> H3, and it's pin-to-pin compatible with H3.
> 
> This patchset adds support for it, along with the first available
> board -- Orange Pi PC2.
> 
> Several H5 boards by Sinovoip Banana Pi and FriendlyARM Nano Pi
> are coming, so we should get ready for them.
> 
> CCU changes are already said to be merged by Maxime Ripard, so
> this patchset now contains only device tree patches.
> 
> Commit messages are changed by the suggestion of Maxime.
> 
> This patchset depends on patchset [1] to finally take effect. At
> least the patch 1 of that patchset is needed if you want to test
> the kernel image -- without it the pinctrl driver won't be built
> and the kernel will become unusable without pinctrl.

It's still not the prefixes I told you to use. I merged your patches
and fixed, but please use the right one next time (and be consistent
in your ARM vs arm usage).

Thanks for your work!
Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v8 0/6] Allwinner H5 and Orange Pi PC2 support

[Maxime Ripard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1719 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:36:43AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> 
> 
> 08.03.2017, 01:07, "Maxime Ripard" <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 01:17:44AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> >>  Allwinner H5 is a 64-bit SoC with a design like the 32-bit
> >>  H3, and it's pin-to-pin compatible with H3.
> >>
> >>  This patchset adds support for it, along with the first available
> >>  board -- Orange Pi PC2.
> >>
> >>  Several H5 boards by Sinovoip Banana Pi and FriendlyARM Nano Pi
> >>  are coming, so we should get ready for them.
> >>
> >>  CCU changes are already said to be merged by Maxime Ripard, so
> >>  this patchset now contains only device tree patches.
> >>
> >>  Commit messages are changed by the suggestion of Maxime.
> >>
> >>  This patchset depends on patchset [1] to finally take effect. At
> >>  least the patch 1 of that patchset is needed if you want to test
> >>  the kernel image -- without it the pinctrl driver won't be built
> >>  and the kernel will become unusable without pinctrl.
> >
> > It's still not the prefixes I told you to use. I merged your patches
> > and fixed, but please use the right one next time (and be consistent
> > in your ARM vs arm usage).
> 
> oh I added dts: to the prefix you told me, as they're device tree patches.
> 
> Is the usage of "dts:" out-dated?

I'd like to at least have a common scheme across regular contributors,
and not the current mess that we have. So, yes, kind of. And it
doesn't make much sense these days where all our changes are either
drivers or dts.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]