From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Valentine <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sata_rcar: Add R-Car Gen2 SATA support
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 21:58:50 +0400
Message-ID: <525C30DA.5060406@cogentembedded.com>
References: <1381765354-28440-1-git-send-email-valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com> <1381765354-28440-3-git-send-email-valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com> <20131014162603.GB19196@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20131014162603.GB19196@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>, "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>, Vladimir Barinov <vladimir.barinov@cogentembedded.com>, Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>, Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@gmx.de>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On 10/14/2013 08:26 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:42:34PM +0100, Valentine Barshak wrote:
>> R-Car Gen2 SoCs have a different PHY which is not compatible
>> with the older R-Car H1 (R8A7779) version.
>> This adds OF/platform device id tables and PHY initialization
>> callbacks for the following Gen2 SoCs:
>>    * R-Car H2: R8A7790;
>>    * R-Car M2: R8A7791.
>>
>> PHY initialization method is chosen, based on the device id.
>> Default PHY settings are applied for Gen2 SoCs, which should
>> suit the Gen2 boards available.
>>
>> The R8A7779 platform code is modified to use "sata-r8a7779"
>> device id.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>
>> ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/ata/sata_rcar.txt          |   5 +-
>>   arch/arm/mach-shmobile/clock-r8a7779.c             |   2 +-
>>   arch/arm/mach-shmobile/setup-r8a7779.c             |   2 +-
>>   drivers/ata/sata_rcar.c                            | 112 ++++++++++++++++++---
>>   4 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/sata_rcar.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/sata_rcar.txt
>> index 2465183..b5a41bf 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/sata_rcar.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/sata_rcar.txt
>> @@ -1,7 +1,10 @@
>>   * Renesas R-Car SATA
>>
>>   Required properties:
>> -- compatible		: must be "renesas,sata-r8a7779"
>> +- compatible		: must be one of the following:
>
> s/must be/should contain/
>
>> +			  - "renesas,sata-r8a7779" for R-Car H1
>> +			  - "renesas,sata-r8a7790" for R-Car H2
>> +			  - "renesas,sata-r8a7791" for R-Car M2
>
> How do renesas,sata-r8a7790 and renesas,sata-r8a7791 differ?
>
>>   - reg			: address range of the SATA registers.
>
> It's a size too...
>
>>   - interrupt-parent	: interrupt parent controller phandle
>
> Not required.
>
> [...]
>
>> +static struct of_device_id sata_rcar_match[] = {
>> +	{
>> +		.compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7779",
>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_GEN1_SATA,
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7790",
>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_GEN2_SATA
>> +	},
>> +	{
>> +		.compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7791",
>> +		.data = (void *)RCAR_GEN2_SATA
>> +	},
>> +	{},
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, sata_rcar_match);
>
> Are the renesas,sata-r8a779x variants identical?
>

Yes.

> If so, why the two strings?

Just thought the driver should support "renesas,sata-r8a7791" 
compatibility as well since it should support both SoCs.
Didn't want to force sata-r8a7790 compatibility for the r8a7791 SoC DTS.

>
> Could we not require sata-r8a7791 devices to have "sata-r8a7790" in the
> compatible list:
>
> 	compatible = "sata-r8a7791", "sata-r8a7790";
>
> That way we can match on "sata-r8a7791" if we want to later, but don't
> need code for it now.

We could. In this case having compatible = "renesas,sata-r8a7791" would 
not be enough, though it looks like a valid compatible list to me.

>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>

Thanks,
Val.