Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] riscv: dts: sophgo: Add LicheeRV Nano board device tree

[Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@outlook.com>]

On 2024/8/30 16:06, Thomas Bonnefille wrote:
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR MIT)
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Copyright (C) 2024 Thomas Bonnefille 
>>>> <thomas.bonnefille@bootlin.com>
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> +/dts-v1/;
>>>> +
>>>> +#include "sg2002.dtsi"
>>>> +
>>>> +/ {
>>>> +    model = "LicheeRV Nano B";
>>>> +    compatible = "sipeed,licheerv-nano-b", "sipeed,licheerv-nano", 
>>>> "sophgo,sg2002";
>>>> +
>>>> +    aliases {
>>>> +        gpio0 = &gpio0;
>>>> +        gpio1 = &gpio1;
>>>> +        gpio2 = &gpio2;
>>>> +        gpio3 = &gpio3;
>>>> +        serial0 = &uart0;
>>>> +        serial1 = &uart1;
>>>> +        serial2 = &uart2;
>>>> +        serial3 = &uart3;
>>>> +        serial4 = &uart4;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    chosen {
>>>> +        stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
>>>> +    };
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&osc {
>>>> +    clock-frequency = <25000000>;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&sdhci0 {
>>>> +    status = "okay";
>>>> +    bus-width = <4>;
>>>> +    no-1-8-v;
>>>> +    no-mmc;
>>>> +    no-sdio;
>>>> +    disable-wp;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&uart0 {
>>>> +    status = "okay";
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&uart1 {
>>>> +    status = "okay";
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +&i2c0 {
>>>> +    status = "okay";
>>>> +};
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.45.2
>>>>
>>> Have you test you patch with a real board? Especially
>>> for device "uart1" and "i2c0", I suspect your
>>> configuartion does not work by default.
>>
>> Hi, Thomas Bonnefille,
>>
>> Can you please double check and feedback, I want to confirm this 
>> before acking this change.
>>
>> As you know, rc6 will come next week and I'm planning a pr next week.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chen
>>
> Hello Chen and Inochi,
>
> I'm really sorry, indeed, those nodes certainly don't work, it was a 
> mistake on my side introduced between v1 and v2.
> However, I can ensure that "uart0" and "sdhci0" are working fine.
> May I suggest to remove those two nodes? I can send a new iteration if 
> it's easier for you to handle?

I'm fine with this, just go ahead please.

Thanks,

Chen