Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] scsi: ufs: dt-bindings: starfive: Add UFS Host Controller for JHB100 soc

[Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1456 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 11:04:22AM +0000, Minda Chen wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 05:12:13PM +0800, Minda Chen wrote:
> > > Add devicetree document for UFS Host Controller StarFive JHB100 SoC.
> > > The UFS controller is based on the Synopsys DesignWare UFS controller.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Minda Chen <minda.chen@starfivetech.com>
> > > ---
> > >  .../devicetree/bindings/ufs/starfive,ufs.yaml | 76 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >  MAINTAINERS                                   |  5 ++
> > >  2 files changed, 81 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/starfive,ufs.yaml
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/starfive,ufs.yaml
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/starfive,ufs.yaml
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..c408973dd0ce
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/starfive,ufs.yaml
> > 
> > Filename should be starfive,jhb100-ufs.
> > 
> Thanks. Conor. I see some vendors's dt-binding doc without IC name
> because ufs host controller registers are standard. So I think if we(StarFive) change
> IP vendor will still using the same driver files and dt doc.  

Other than lack of oversight or age of the bindings, there's no real
reason for filenames not matching the compatible. UFS isn't special
here.

> If the scsi UFS maintainer no comments to this I will change this.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]