PolarFire SoC /does/ have a SiFive pdma, despite what I suggested as a
conflict resolution to Zong. Somehow the entry fell through the cracks
between versions of my dt patches, so re-add it with Zong's updated
compatible & dma-channels property.
Fixes: c5094f3710 ("riscv: dts: microchip: refactor icicle kit device tree")
Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Currently mpfs-fabric.dtsi is included by mpfs.dtsi - which is fine
currently since there is only one board with this SoC upstream.
However if another board was added, it would include the fabric contents
of the Icicle Kit's reference design. To avoid this, rename
mpfs-fabric.dtsi to mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi & include it in the dts
rather than mpfs.dtsi.
mpfs-icicle-kit-fabric.dtsi specifically matches the 22.03 reference
design for the icicle kit's FPGA fabric & an older version of the
design may not have the i2c or pwm devices - so add the compatible
string to document this.
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220509142610.128590-6-conor.dooley@microchip.com
Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
Having the SoC vendor both as the directory and in the filename adds
little. Remove microchip from the filenames so that the files will
resemble the other directories in riscv (and arm64). The new names
follow a soc-board.dts & soc{,-fabric}.dtsi pattern.
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220509142610.128590-4-conor.dooley@microchip.com
Signed-off-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
Conor Dooley