[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEHZuqO-WBFzxhrvO-H-dorHDxjoNzLKXMS02SAj2KnOt5ZOaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:22:05 +0530
From: Raviteja Garimella <raviteja.garimella@...adcom.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 4/5] DT bindings documentation for Synopsys UDC platform driver
Hi Rob,
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 01:35:07PM +0530, Raviteja Garimella wrote:
>> This patch adds device tree bindings documentation for Synopsys
>> USB device controller platform driver.
>
> Bindings describe h/w, not drivers.
Will correct the commit message.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Raviteja Garimella <raviteja.garimella@...adcom.com>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/usb/snps,dw-ahb-udc.txt | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/snps,dw-ahb-udc.txt
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/snps,dw-ahb-udc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/snps,dw-ahb-udc.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..0c18327
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/snps,dw-ahb-udc.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
>> +Synopsys USB Device controller.
>> +
>> +The device node is used for Synopsys Designware Cores AHB
>> +Subsystem Device Controller (UDC).
>> +
>> +This device node is used by UDCs integrated it Broadcom's
>> +Northstar2 and Cygnus SoC's.
>
> You need compatible strings for these in addition.
Is it fine to have "brcm,iproc-udc"?
iProc refers to a Broadcom family of processors that includes
above mentioned SoCs.
I see there are some compatible strings that are based on the IP,
and some based on the SoCs. I chose to have the IP based string.
Please let me know which one would be agreeable in this case.
I will also correct the typo in the above notes -- it meant to be
UDCs integrated into Broadcom's Northstar2 and Cygnus SoC's.
>
>> +
>> +Required properties:
>> + - compatible: should be "snps,dw-ahb-udc"
>
> This is a different IP than DWC2?
Yes, this is different IP. DWC2 is HS OTG.
>
>> + - reg: Offset and length of UDC register set
>> + - interrupts: description of interrupt line
>> + - phys: phandle to phy node.
>> + - extcon: phandle to the extcon device. This is optional and
>> + not required for those that don't require extcon support.
>> + Extcon support will be required if the UDC is connected to
>> + a Dual Role Device Phy that supports both Host and Device
>> + mode based on the external cable.
>
> Drop this. It should be a part of the phy. Also, I don't care to see new
> users of extcon binding because it needs redoing.
Currently we can't get the extcon node from Phy.
"extcon_get_edev_by_phandle" requires "extcon" property, else would fail.
As Scott said in one of the comments, we can drop this when we get that
support in kernel. Is it fine?
Thanks,
Ravi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists