My response tagged <br><br><br>-------- Original Message --------<br>From: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net><br>Date: Tue, January 11, 2022 7:15 PM -0600<br>To: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au><br>CC: devicetree <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, linux-aspeed <linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>, OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Neil Horman <neil.horman@privafy.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Anthony Jenkins <anthony.jenkins@privafy.com>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org><br>Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: aspeed: Add ASRock ROMED8HM3 BMC<br><br><br>On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 02:59:28AM PST, Joel Stanley wrote:<br>>On Wed, 5 Jan 2022 at 23:10, Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net> wrote:<br>>><br>>> This is a half-width, single-socket Epyc server board with an AST2500<br>>> BMC. This device tree is sufficient for basic OpenBMC functionality,<br>>> but we'll need to add a few more devices (as driver support becomes<br>>> available) before it's fully usable.<br>>><br>>> Signed-off-by: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net><br>><br>>Reviewed-by: Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au><br>><br><br>Thanks!<br><br>>Have you considered using the openbmc gpio naming scheme for the<br>>gpio-line-names?<br>><br><br>I looked at it, but decided not to for a few reasons:<br><br> - For systems that are in the early stages of a porting effort (like <br> this one currently is), I'm still referring to hardware schematics <br> fairly often, and using the same identifiers in software that are <br> used in the schematics simplifies things by avoiding an extra<br> translation step between the two.<br><br> - Most of the GPIO-related userspace components (that I'm dealing with <br> anyway, e.g. x86-power-control and host-error-monitor) already have <br> their own GPIO line-name configuration/remapping mechanisms that need <br> to be set up anyway.<br><br> - There's a solid mix of GPIOs that would be covered by the naming <br> guidelines and others that aren't; having a mix of the two styles <br> seems a bit awkward to me.<br><br>That said, I sympathize with the motivation behind it and I'm not <br>vehemently opposed on the whole, so if there's a strong preference to <br>follow that scheme I could probably be talked into changing it.<br><br><br><br>Milton > Did this assessment take into consideration <br> Milton > <a href="https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/49863" target="_blank">https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/docs/+/49863</a><br><br>Milton > is there something that could be improved? <br><br><br>Zev<br><br><BR>
<BR>