On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:03:36AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 15/05/2024 09:50, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > >> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > >>> Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as > >>> 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices. > >> > >> Can you point out where that's been documented? > > > > Typo here. s/Devicetree binding/Devicetree spec > > > > https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#generic-names-recommendation > > I read your explanation in DT spec commit: > > "In a lot of places, 'ufs' is used as the node name to identify the host > controller, but it is wrong since 'ufs' denotes 'UFS device'." > > but isn't this the same as with MMC? We do not call the nodes "mmchc" or > "mmch", even though all of them are hosts, because "mmc" is the card. > The same for most of other storage devices. Or USB. The term > "controller" appears only for few cases like clocks, resets and power. > The compatible for UFS HC is '*-ufshc', so it makes sense to use 'ufshc' as the node name. But for other bus controllers like MMC, compatible just mentions 'mmc'. And there were already nodes using both 'ufshc' and 'ufs', so I wanted to avoid the confusion and just use 'ufshc'. - Mani -- மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
