On Fri, May 05, 2017 at 03:01:04AM +0000, Y.B. Lu wrote:
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-esdhc.txt
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-esdhc.txt
> > > index dedfb02..b04b248 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-esdhc.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-esdhc.txt
> > > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ This file documents differences between the core
> > > properties described by mmc.txt and the properties used by the sdhci-
> > esdhc driver.
> > >
> > > Required properties:
> > > + - compatible : should be "fsl,esdhc", or "fsl,<chip>-esdhc".
> >
> > I think either supported <chip> or the compatible should be listed
> > explicitly.
> >
>
> [Lu Yangbo-B47093] I think the reason we use <chip> is to avoid listing too much chips, and to avoid doc updating if new chips are added.
> The checkpatch script also had considered that.
>
> Currently there're about 20 platforms with "fsl,<chip>-esdhc" compatible in kernel dts.
> And the doc also provide an example.
> Example:
>
> sdhci@2e000 {
> compatible = "fsl,mpc8378-esdhc", "fsl,esdhc";
>
> Should we still need to list all ?
I anyway need an ACK from Rob on this patch. Let's see what he would
say.
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
