Re: [PATCH RFC 0/4] MVEBU SoC full USB support

[Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>]

On 06/25/2014 09:18 PM, Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 04:08:44PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> This *RFC* adds a driver stub for ChipIdea USB dual role controllers
>> found on Marvell MVEBU SoCs. Although, I consider this driver quite
>> finished, the corresponding DT binding is not. Also, we currently
>> have no corresponding driver in Linux for both MVEBU CI stub and
>> USB PHY.
>>
>> The reason I send it here and now, is to get some input from the
>> (Linux) MVEBU guys on the binding and functional tests on Armada XP.
> 
> My first thought is if this chipidea IP is used beyond the mvebu
> ecosystem.  Shouldn't we name it and it's compatible strings with
> 'chipidea' instead of 'marvell'?

While the IP core is CI, you remember the mbus upstream registers?
That registers are very special to MVEBU SoCs and make the IP itself
"marvell".

But I agree, that we could add "chipidea", although spec itself names
it "ARC" already. ARC aquired CI and was later bought by Synopsys, but
at that time it must have been ARC.

> Also, is there any other way to differentiate between the two versions
> other that manufacturing process resolution?  Perhaps the free-electrons
> guys could get us some IP revision numbers?

I just followed how Marvell's BSP differentiates USB PHYs. In addition
to 40nm and 65nm, there will be 90nm and 130nm for the older SoCs.

If there is a way for free-electron to get more information about a
better naming, that would be nice.

Sebastian


_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox