[PATCH v4 01/10] dt-bindings: vendor-prefixes: add bouffalolab

[Jisheng Zhang]

On Thu, May 18, 2023 at 09:53:12PM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> Hi Jisheng,
> 
> Thanks for updating this series!
> 
> On 5/18/23 10:22, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > In the following commits, we will support bl808 SoC which is from
> > Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> > 
> > Add bouffalolab vendor prefix binding.
> > 
> > Link: https://en.bouffalolab.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at kernel.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer at rivosinc.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > index 82d39ab0231b..3566346f2f9e 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.yaml
> > @@ -200,6 +200,8 @@ patternProperties:
> >      description: BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd.
> >    "^bosch,.*":
> >      description: Bosch Sensortec GmbH
> > +  "^bouffalolab,.*":
> > +    description: Bouffalo Lab Technology (Nanjing) Co., Ltd.
> 
> Have you thought about using the "bflb" abbreviation as the vendor

I did think about bflb vs bouffalolab. Here is what I thought: I came
across "marvell" vs "mrvl" sevral years ago, I got an impression
"marvell" vendor prefix is preferred if I read the discussions
correctly.

As for Bouffalolab vendor prefix, I have no preference, maybe DT
maintainers can provide inputs here.
Rob, Conor, Krzysztof, what's your opinion?

Thanks

> prefix, like you use throughout the driver code? This would save quite
> some space in the DTB, and seems to be the most common variant seen in
> the vendor SDK:
> 
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bflb | wc -l
> 14364
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalo | wc -l
> 1042
> bouffalo_sdk$ git grep -i bouffalolab | wc -l
> 179
> 
> So that is what we were using for bringing up Linux and U-Boot over at
> https://github.com/openbouffalo.
> 
> On the other hand, "bouffalolab" is certainly accurate as well, so I
> understand if you prefer it. And we will of course adapt to whatever
> gets merged, since our goal is upstreaming.
> 
> The vendor code drop[1] provided only one example, "bflb-uart,uart0",
> which is not very helpful. Maybe you have received further information
> from them?
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Regards,
> Samuel
> 
> [1]:
> https://github.com/bouffalolab/bl808_linux/blob/main/linux-5.10.4-808/drivers/tty/serial/bflb_uart.c#L700
>