[PATCH] ipq95xx: Add support for IPQ9574 RDP433

[Piotr Dymacz]

Hi Robert,

Adding John's correct e-mail to the loop.

On 8.12.2023 11:02, Robert Marko wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Dec 2023 at 11:01, Piotr Dymacz <pepe2k at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> On 7.12.2023 12:52, Robert Marko wrote:
>> >
>> > On 07. 12. 2023. 12:20, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 11:11:03AM +0100, Robert Marko wrote:
>> >>> On 07. 12. 2023. 10:59, Varadarajan Narayanan wrote:
>> >>>>    SoC     : QCOM IPQ9574
>> >>>>    RAM     : 2GB DDR4
>> >>>>    Flash   : eMMC 8GB
>> >>>>    WiFi    : 1 x 2.4GHz
>> >>>>              1 x 5GHz
>> >>>>              1 x 6GHz
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <quic_varada at quicinc.com>
>> >>> Without even looking at the code, please split this up as its
>> >>> not reviewable at all currently.
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, I would strongly encourage using Github PR for this.
>> >> This patch just has the base SoC/board support and not drivers for
>> >> WiFi/ethernet/USB etc. Can you kindly guide on what kind
>> >> of split is acceptable for the community.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >> Varada
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> > I would at least split the target itself, patches and then the board
>> > itself for the start.
>>
>> Would it make sense to rename qualcommax to qualcomm and make ipq95xx
>> just another subtarget of it (I'm aware of A53 vs. A73)?
> 
> That depends on how much is shared between the AX SoC-s and the BE
> ones(IPQ95xx and IPQ53xx).

I would say enough to keep them together.

> But, I would prefer that or qualcommbe target where new BE SoC-s will
> be subtargets.

I'm personally more a fan of limiting number of top targets and deal 
with differences under subtargets.

-- 
Cheers,
Piotr

> 
> Regards,
> Robert
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> Piotr
>>
>> >
>> > Also, please sort the patches by prefix such as:
>> > 0xx are backports (Kernel version from which they are backported must be
>> > marked as well)
>> > 1xx are pending
>> > 9xx are usually hacks/stuff that currently cannot be upstreamed.
>> >
>> > Again, I would strongly encourage using Github PR for large changes such
>> > as these as its much
>> > easier to comment on certain changes and it has a lot larger reach than
>> > the OpenWrt mailing list
>> > as not all interested parties even follow this list.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Robert
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > openwrt-devel mailing list
>> > openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
>> > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
>>