[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqKU4opYerjxXTnAuouLc5-GQQKnPX+qZEMBuzYV-inmJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 10:09:29 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Yash Shah <yash.shah@...ive.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Piotr Sroka <piotrs@...ence.com>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] dt-bindings: mmc: cdns: match MPFS MMC/SDHCI controller
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 2:02 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com> wrote:
>
> On 24/08/2021 16:33, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 05:44:32PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> The Microchip MPFS Icicle Kit uses Cadence SD/SDIO/eMMC Host Controller
> >> without any additional vendor compatible:
> >
> > I think the lack of vendor compatible is the error here. Experience has
> > shown that vendor specific compatibles are needed for licensed IP.
> >
>
> In such case this could be:
> 1. a specific "microchip,mpfs250t-sd4hc", which
> seems to be on MPFS Icicle Kit:
> https://www.digikey.co.uk/en/product-highlight/m/microchip-technology/mpfs-icicle-kit-es--polarfire-soc-fpga-icicle-kit
>
> 2. or a generic "microchip,mpfs-sd4hc"
>
> Any hints here?
Best for a Microchip person to answer, but sure there's some existing
compatible strings for other blocks on this chip to follow the same
pattern.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists