[PATCH 07/11] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add USB nodes for RK3528

[Chukun Pan]

Hi,

> That is what I did for ROCK 2A testing I added the usb3-phy to the board
> dts. Mostly for two reasons, first because I did not want to make this
> series fully depend on the naneng-combphy series. And secondly because
> the ROCK 2A also have some sort of GPIO controlled mux for USB3 and PCIe
> signals that may affect how usb3 support is described in the device tree.

I tested this on a rk3528 board (usb3 only) with a usb hub:

~# lsusb -t
/:  Bus 001.Port 001: Dev 001, Class=root_hub, Driver=xhci-hcd/1p, 480M
    |__ Port 001: Dev 002, If 0, Class=[unknown], Driver=hub/4p, 480M
/:  Bus 002.Port 001: Dev 001, Class=root_hub, Driver=xhci-hcd/1p, 5000M
    |__ Port 001: Dev 002, If 0, Class=[unknown], Driver=hub/4p, 5000M
        |__ Port 002: Dev 003, If 0, Class=[unknown], Driver=usb-storage, 5000M
/:  Bus 003.Port 001: Dev 001, Class=root_hub, Driver=ehci-platform/1p, 480M
/:  Bus 004.Port 001: Dev 001, Class=root_hub, Driver=ohci-platform/1p, 12M

> I am open to ideas on how or what default phys to include in soc dtsi.

I have no problem with this, either is fine.

> > Maybe "snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk" is needed?
>
> Maybe, it did not seem to be needed when I tested USB2.0 only or USB3.0,
> will run some more tests on my boards.
>
> Any issues you know that snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk would help fix?

This appears to be to allow the DWC3 core to reliably detect the Vbus
status of the connected PHY. Not sure if this is really needed.

> From what I could see these nodes are named u2phy for 8 other Rockchip
> SoCs and only named usb2phy for 3. So I went with what the majority seem
> to be calling them.

The name u2phy comes from the downstream BSP, and I think it doesn't hurt
to call it usb2phy.

Thanks,
Chukun

--
2.25.1