From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Srinivas Kandagatla Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] ata: ahci-platform: Add ports-implemented dt bindings. Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 18:10:03 +0100 Message-ID: <56FAB6EB.6040802@linaro.org> References: <1459257075-21393-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <1459257075-21393-3-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <56FA947A.5080806@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Tejun Heo , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , Andy Gross , Hans de Goede , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-arm-msm , linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , jmaggard10@gmail.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 29/03/16 18:07, Rob Herring wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla > wrote: >> >> >> On 29/03/16 15:11, Rob Herring wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On some SOCs PORTS_IMPL register value is never programmed by the BIOS >>> >>> >>> s/BIOS/firmware/ >> >> BIOS is the word used in the AHCI SPECS so want to stick to this. > > The spec being Intel's also says it is a PCI device... BIOS is a type > of firmware. Ofcourse. > > [...] > >>>> + sata0: sata@29000000 { /* Qualcomm APQ8064 */ >>> >>> >>> Do you really need another example just for this? >>> >>>> + compatible = "generic-ahci"; >>> >>> >>> Where's your chip specific compatible string? You would not require a >>> DT update to fix this if you had that. >> >> >> Possibly, But we really are not doing anything specific in the ahci driver >> which is not generic, that might be the reason why we skipped this in the >> first place. >> >> I agree we could solve this issue in more than one way, The only advantage >> of this new bindings would be to other platforms benefiting from this >> workaround would not have to keep adding a new compatible string into the >> ahci-platform driver. >> >> Like Annapurna Alpine platform seems to have the same issue. >> >> Am ok to do it either way. > > I'm saying do both. Adding ports-implemented is fine, but add an SoC > compatible string (in the dts, not the driver). That sounds Good, I will add compatible string in DT and implement ports-implemented. --srini > > Rob >