On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 09:20:11AM +0800, Peter Chen wrote:
> > > @@ -226,6 +235,16 @@ static int mxs_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >
> > > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, mxs_phy);
> > >
> > > + if (mxs_phy->data->flags & MXS_PHY_HAS_ANATOP) {
> > > + mxs_phy->regmap_anatop = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle
> > > + (np, "fsl,anatop");
> > > + if (IS_ERR(mxs_phy->regmap_anatop)) {
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
> > > + "failed to find regmap for anatop\n");
> > > + return PTR_ERR(mxs_phy->regmap_anatop);
> >
> > I'm looking at the merge dependency that Felipe mentions, and just think
> > of the DTB compatibility thing. Does the above code mean that USB will
> > be broken if someone runs the new kernel with an old DTB on his board?
> >
> > We're entering the stage where we need to maintain the DTB compatibility
> > in kernel. That said, if users choose to upgrade their kernel only
> > (running with an old DTB), it's okay we do not give them new
> > features, but we shouldn't cause any regression/breakage for them.
> >
>
> Then, this patch needs to change for old imx6 DTB. I will use of_find_property
> like my previous version patch, do you think so?
>
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=138361742123380&w=2
Yes. Basically, we need to add the new property as optional one and
keep the driver work in the existing way if the property is absent.
Shawn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
