From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752509AbbKVTtd (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:49:33 -0500 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([95.129.55.99]:50716 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752012AbbKVTtc (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:49:32 -0500 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Doug Anderson Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , Romain Perier , Arnd Bergmann , Lin Huang Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] phy: rockchip-usb: add compatible values for rk3066a and rk3188 Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 20:49:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1586601.dy8rrhuEYg@phil> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.2.0-1-amd64; KDE/4.14.13; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <1447968149-10979-1-git-send-email-heiko@sntech.de> <1447968149-10979-5-git-send-email-heiko@sntech.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Donnerstag, 19. November 2015, 16:32:23 schrieb Doug Anderson: > Heiko, > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > We need custom handling for these two socs in the driver shortly, > > so add the necessary compatible values to binding and driver. > > > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-usb-phy.txt | 5 ++++- > > drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c | 2 ++ > > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-usb-phy.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-usb-phy.txt > > index 826454a..9b37242 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-usb-phy.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/rockchip-usb-phy.txt > > @@ -1,7 +1,10 @@ > > ROCKCHIP USB2 PHY > > > > Required properties: > > - - compatible: rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy > > + - compatible: matching the soc type, one of > > + "rockchip,rk3066a-usb-phy" > > + "rockchip,rk3188-usb-phy" > > + "rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy" > > I can never quite keep it straight how this is supposed to work, but > since previously only "rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy" was supported and now > we have these new compatible strings, I would have expected the new > strings to specify the old ones as fallback. That would mean your > choices would be: > > - "rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy" - A real rk3288 > - "rockchip,rk3188-usb-phy", "rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy" - A rk3188 with > fallback to 3288 driver. > - "rockchip,rk3066a-usb-phy", "rockchip,rk3288-usb-phy" - A rk3066a > with fallback to 3288 driver. How this is supposed to be done also is sometimes confusing for me :-) But I don't think that specifying the "fallbacks" is part of the binding at all, when the binding really is done in a soc-specific way. For example following the suggestion of the dt-maintainers at the time we're specifying the uarts as compatible = "rockchip,rk3288-uart", "snps,dw-apb-uart" as a measure to use a more-special driver if there is ever the need for it. But here the "snps,dw-apb-uart" actually is a superset (a more generic implementation), while in the usb-uart-case > That means that if you land the dts changes without the driver changes > that things still work OK. We already have the alternative for the usb-phys in the devicetree, but I still don't think that this alternative is part of the binding itself :-) Heiko