Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Kirkwood: ehci-orion: Add device tree binding

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Kirkwood: ehci-orion: Add device tree binding

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,

Sorry for the late feedback but I didn't notice this until I looked at
the pull request from Jason.

Please go back and revisit these bindings. I'll merge in the current
version but they need to be fixed up.

Also, always cc devicetree-discuss and the DT maintainers on new bindings.

On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Lunn <andrew-g2DYL2Zd6BY@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Based on previous work by Michael Walle and Jason Cooper.
>
> Made their work actually work, which required added interrupt from DT
> and auxdata, along with setting the dma_mask, which DT does not
> currently do.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew-g2DYL2Zd6BY@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/usb/ehci-orion.txt         |   19 +++++++
>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-orion.c                      |   59 +++++++++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ehci-orion.txt
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ehci-orion.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ehci-orion.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..1bd704e
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ehci-orion.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +* EHCI controller, Orion Marvell variants
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: must be "marvell,orion-ehci"
> +- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
> +  region.
> +- interrupts: The EHCI interrupt
> +- phy-version: Can be one of:
> +  "NA" - Don't touch the phy, something else has already configured it.
> +  "orion5x" - PHY setup as specified by the Orion5x Errata
> +
> +Example:
> +
> +       ehci@50000 {
> +               compatible = "marvell,orion-ehci";
> +               reg = <0x50000 0x1000>;
> +               interrupts = <19>;
> +               phy-version = "NA";
> +       };

This isn't an appropriate binding for phy. I know, it maps straight
over from the platform data, but it doesn't focus on what the actual
hardware is.

A couple of options. What probably makes most sense depending on how
other phy bindings are moving ahead is to add a phy node under the
ehci controller for the "orion5x" case, and have an appropriate
compatible value there. No node means the same as "NA" in the above
binding. Alternatively, have a phy phandle that points to the phy
device if it sits on an i2c bus, etc.


-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Kirkwood: ehci-orion: Add device tree binding

[Andrew Lunn]

> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: must be "marvell,orion-ehci"
> > +- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
> > +  region.
> > +- interrupts: The EHCI interrupt
> > +- phy-version: Can be one of:
> > +  "NA" - Don't touch the phy, something else has already configured it.
> > +  "orion5x" - PHY setup as specified by the Orion5x Errata
> > +
> > +Example:
> > +
> > +       ehci@50000 {
> > +               compatible = "marvell,orion-ehci";
> > +               reg = <0x50000 0x1000>;
> > +               interrupts = <19>;
> > +               phy-version = "NA";
> > +       };
> 
> This isn't an appropriate binding for phy. I know, it maps straight
> over from the platform data, but it doesn't focus on what the actual
> hardware is.
> 
> A couple of options. What probably makes most sense depending on how
> other phy bindings are moving ahead is to add a phy node under the
> ehci controller for the "orion5x" case, and have an appropriate
> compatible value there. No node means the same as "NA" in the above
> binding. Alternatively, have a phy phandle that points to the phy
> device if it sits on an i2c bus, etc.

I Olaf

Could i suggest a third option:

I just drop USB phy configuration all together.  Only mach-orion5x
needs this and nobody has shown any interest in moving mach-orion5x to
DT. So i would just hard code it to "NA".

If anybody does show interest in DT for orion5x, we can add a phy node
under ehci as a pure extension which does not affect backward
compatibility.

	Thanks
		Andrew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Kirkwood: ehci-orion: Add device tree binding

[Olof Johansson]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 09:13:53AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > +Required properties:
> > > +- compatible: must be "marvell,orion-ehci"
> > > +- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
> > > +  region.
> > > +- interrupts: The EHCI interrupt
> > > +- phy-version: Can be one of:
> > > +  "NA" - Don't touch the phy, something else has already configured it.
> > > +  "orion5x" - PHY setup as specified by the Orion5x Errata
> > > +
> > > +Example:
> > > +
> > > +       ehci@50000 {
> > > +               compatible = "marvell,orion-ehci";
> > > +               reg = <0x50000 0x1000>;
> > > +               interrupts = <19>;
> > > +               phy-version = "NA";
> > > +       };
> > 
> > This isn't an appropriate binding for phy. I know, it maps straight
> > over from the platform data, but it doesn't focus on what the actual
> > hardware is.
> > 
> > A couple of options. What probably makes most sense depending on how
> > other phy bindings are moving ahead is to add a phy node under the
> > ehci controller for the "orion5x" case, and have an appropriate
> > compatible value there. No node means the same as "NA" in the above
> > binding. Alternatively, have a phy phandle that points to the phy
> > device if it sits on an i2c bus, etc.
> 
> I Olaf
> 
> Could i suggest a third option:
> 
> I just drop USB phy configuration all together.  Only mach-orion5x
> needs this and nobody has shown any interest in moving mach-orion5x to
> DT. So i would just hard code it to "NA".
> 
> If anybody does show interest in DT for orion5x, we can add a phy node
> under ehci as a pure extension which does not affect backward
> compatibility.

Yeah, that works too.


-Olof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: Kirkwood: ehci-orion: Add device tree binding

[Jason Cooper]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:49:41PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 09:13:53AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > > +Required properties:
> > > > +- compatible: must be "marvell,orion-ehci"
> > > > +- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
> > > > +  region.
> > > > +- interrupts: The EHCI interrupt
> > > > +- phy-version: Can be one of:
> > > > +  "NA" - Don't touch the phy, something else has already configured it.
> > > > +  "orion5x" - PHY setup as specified by the Orion5x Errata
> > > > +
> > > > +Example:
> > > > +
> > > > +       ehci@50000 {
> > > > +               compatible = "marvell,orion-ehci";
> > > > +               reg = <0x50000 0x1000>;
> > > > +               interrupts = <19>;
> > > > +               phy-version = "NA";
> > > > +       };
> > > 
> > > This isn't an appropriate binding for phy. I know, it maps straight
> > > over from the platform data, but it doesn't focus on what the actual
> > > hardware is.
> > > 
> > > A couple of options. What probably makes most sense depending on how
> > > other phy bindings are moving ahead is to add a phy node under the
> > > ehci controller for the "orion5x" case, and have an appropriate
> > > compatible value there. No node means the same as "NA" in the above
> > > binding. Alternatively, have a phy phandle that points to the phy
> > > device if it sits on an i2c bus, etc.
> > 
> > I Olaf
> > 
> > Could i suggest a third option:
> > 
> > I just drop USB phy configuration all together.  Only mach-orion5x
> > needs this and nobody has shown any interest in moving mach-orion5x to
> > DT. So i would just hard code it to "NA".
> > 
> > If anybody does show interest in DT for orion5x, we can add a phy node
> > under ehci as a pure extension which does not affect backward
> > compatibility.
> 
> Yeah, that works too.

Andrew,

Did I miss the update of this series/patch?

thx,

Jason.