From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com (Sergei Shtylyov) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 23:13:15 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v2][ 6/8] ARM: dts: i.MX35: Add USB support. In-Reply-To: <1394535304-10240-6-git-send-email-denis@eukrea.com> References: <1394535304-10240-1-git-send-email-denis@eukrea.com> <1394535304-10240-6-git-send-email-denis@eukrea.com> Message-ID: <531F6E5B.7070802@cogentembedded.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello. On 03/11/2014 01:55 PM, Denis Carikli wrote: > Signed-off-by: Denis Carikli > --- > Changelog v1->v2: > - The usbphy nodes were made to look like the ones in imx53.dtsi > - The patch was rebased on top of the clock fixes commits. > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35.dtsi | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35.dtsi > index 474a73d..b943123 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/imx35.dtsi > @@ -298,6 +298,7 @@ > interrupts = <37>; > clocks = <&clks 73>; > fsl,usbmisc = <&usbmisc 0>; > + fsl,usbphy = <&usbphy0>; Why use Freescale specific prop here, when there's de-facto standard "usb-phy" already? > @@ -307,6 +308,7 @@ > interrupts = <35>; > clocks = <&clks 73>; > fsl,usbmisc = <&usbmisc 1>; > + fsl,usbphy = <&usbphy1>; Likewise. > @@ -355,4 +357,18 @@ > }; > }; > }; > + > + usbphy { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + compatible = "simple-bus"; > + > + usbphy0: usbphy at 0 { Why use the node name with the address part when you don't have "reg" prop? Moreover, I suggest "usb-phy" instead to be more in line with ePAPR [1] specified "ethernet-phy" device nodes. [1] http://www.power.org/resources/downloads/Power_ePAPR_APPROVED_v1.0.pdf WBR, Sergei