[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YYMx28VvhR7nvMlt@robh.at.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 20:05:31 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com>
Cc: Jesse Taube <mr.bossman075@...il.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>,
Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
soc@...nel.org, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@....com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu@...hiba.co.jp>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: Add sdhc support for
i.MXRT series
On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 12:30:17AM +0100, Giulio Benetti wrote:
> Hi Fabio, Jesse, All,
>
> On 11/3/21 12:25 AM, Jesse Taube wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/2/21 19:17, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:57 PM Jesse Taube <mr.bossman075@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > static struct esdhc_soc_data usdhc_imx8qxp_data = {
> > > > .flags = ESDHC_FLAG_USDHC | ESDHC_FLAG_STD_TUNING
> > > > @@ -357,6 +363,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id imx_esdhc_dt_ids[] = {
> > > > { .compatible = "fsl,imx7ulp-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx7ulp_data, },
> > > > { .compatible = "fsl,imx8qxp-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx8qxp_data, },
> > > > { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mm-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx8mm_data, },
> > > > + { .compatible = "fsl,imxrt-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imxrt_data, },
> > >
> > > I thought Rob suggested to use the SoC name, so this would be:
> > >
> > Uh i think that may have been for the UART.
> > > { .compatible = "fsl,imxrt1050-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imxrt1050_data, },
> > >
> > > The same applies to the other bindings in the series.
> > >
> > > This way it would be possible to differentiate between future
> > > supported i.MX RT devices.
> > >
> > This makes sense will do in V3.
> >
>
> If we add every SoC we will end up having a long list for every device
> driver. At the moment it would be 7 parts:
> 1) imxrt1020
> 2) imxrt1024
> .
> .
> .
> 7) imxrt1170
You don't need a driver update if you use a fallback. When you add
the 2nd chip, if you think it is 'the same', then you do:
compatible = "fsl,imxrt1024-usdhc", "fsl,imxrt1050-usdhc";
That requires no driver update until the driver needs to handle some
difference. And when there is a difference, you don't need a DT update.
You could make "fsl,imxrt-usdhc" the fallback from the start if you are
adverse to the first way.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists