[PATCH 2/3] Documentation: bindings: add usb3-host-disable and usb3-host-port for Rockchip USB Type-C PHY

[Rob Herring]

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Enric Balletbo Serra
<eballetbo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> 2018-02-08 18:52 GMT+01:00 Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>:
>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 9:20 AM, Enric Balletbo i Serra
>> <enric.balletbo at collabora.com> wrote:
>>> From: William wu <wulf at rock-chips.com>
>>>
>>> rockchip,usb3-host-disable is the register of type-c phy disable usb3 host
>>> rockchip,usb3-host-port is the register of type-c phy usb3 port number
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: William wu <wulf at rock-chips.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo at collabora.com>
>>> ---
>>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.txt | 6 ++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.txt
>>> index c3be83be9615..9085d95d0079 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.txt
>>> @@ -36,6 +36,12 @@ offset, enable bit, write mask bit.
>>>   - rockchip,uphy-dp-sel : the register of type-c phy enable DP function
>>>     for type-c phy0, it must be <0x6268 19 19>;
>>>     for type-c phy1, it must be <0x6268 3 19>;
>>> + - rockchip,usb3-host-disable : the register of type-c phy disable usb3 host
>>> +   for type-c phy0, it must be <0x2434 0 16>;
>>> +   for type-c phy1, it must be <0x2444 0 16>;
>>> + - rockchip,usb3-host-port : the register of type-c phy usb3 port number
>>> +   for type-c phy0, it must be <0x2434 12 28>;
>>> +   for type-c phy1, it must be <0x2444 12 28>;
>>
>> When does this list stop? Adding properties for various register
>> fields doesn't scale. This information should be in the driver and
>> based on the compatible string if necessary.
>>
>
> I see, seams reasonable to me, is this applicable to the new ones only
> or I should get rid of all the proprieties like this from the DT
> (including the old ones)?

We're already kind of stuck with the existing ones. So it depends if
people want to phase them out or not.

Rob