[PATCH v4 0/2] ohci and ehci-platform clks, phy and dt support
Tomasz Figa
tomasz.figa at gmail.com
Sun Jan 12 08:04:26 EST 2014
Hi,
[Cc'ing DT maintainers directly]
On 12.01.2014 04:04, Tony Prisk wrote:
> On 12/01/14 11:30, Alan Stern wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Jan 2014, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2014 12:50 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> On 01/11/2014 01:46 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Here is v4 of my ohci and ehci-platform clks, phy and dt support
>>>>> patch-set,
>>>>> this version should be 100% ready for merging upstream.
>>>> I see you've decided to completely ignore my opinion. NAK, FWIW.
>>> I'm sorry but the whole prefix thing has become a thing of
>>> -ETOOMUCHBIKESHEDDING,
>>> everyone except you seems to be fine with mmio and and one point in
>>> time we
>>> need to make a decision and move forward.
>> If this isn't beating a dead horse... Maybe everyone can agree on a
>> name like ohci-generic or generic-ohci. That seems like a pretty good
>> description of the hardware that the platform driver can handle.
>>
>> Alan Stern
> I prefer the -generic option, although generic- is equally fine - Having
> said that, I don't really care if it's called mmio either (although this
> does seem less 'descriptive').
Grepping over existing dts files, I can find several occurrences of
"usb-ehci" compatible string:
at91sam9g45.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91sam9g45-ehci", "usb-ehci";
at91sam9x5.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91sam9g45-ehci", "usb-ehci";
omap3.dtsi: compatible = "ti,ehci-omap",
"usb-ehci";
omap4.dtsi: compatible = "ti,ehci-omap",
"usb-ehci";
omap5.dtsi: compatible = "ti,ehci-omap",
"usb-ehci";
sama5d3.dtsi: compatible = "atmel,at91sam9g45-ehci",
"usb-ehci";
spear13xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci";
spear13xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci";
spear3xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci";
spear600.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci";
spear600.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra114.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra114.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra30.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra30.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "usb-ehci";
tegra30.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "usb-ehci";
Same for "usb-ohci":
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91rm9200.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9260.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9263.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g45.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9n12.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9x5.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/lpc32xx.dtsi: compatible =
"nxp,ohci-nxp", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3.dtsi: compatible =
"ti,ohci-omap3", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4.dtsi: compatible =
"ti,ohci-omap3", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5.dtsi: compatible =
"ti,ohci-omap3", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/sama5d3.dtsi: compatible =
"atmel,at91rm9200-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear3xx.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear3xx.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear600.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
arch/arm/boot/dts/spear600.dtsi: compatible =
"st,spear600-ohci", "usb-ohci";
For "usb-ehci" there is even a documentation file [1], while "usb-ohci"
seems to be undocumented.
[1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-ehci.txt
Aren't they both something that should be accounted for in this series?
Best regards,
Tomasz
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list