>> num-ports = <2>;
>> status = "okay";
>> };
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/animeo_ip.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/animeo_ip.dts
>> index 29936bfbeeb7..911c8d9ee013 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/animeo_ip.dts
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/animeo_ip.dts
>> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ ubi@60000 {
>> };
>> };
>>
>> - usb0: ohci@500000 {
>> + ohci: usb@500000 {
>> num-ports = <2>;
>> atmel,vbus-gpio = <&pioB 15 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>> status = "okay";
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/at91-ariag25.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/at91-ariag25.dts
>> index 713d18f80356..fedcf30a924e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/at91-ariag25.dts
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/microchip/at91-ariag25.dts
>> @@ -173,11 +173,11 @@ &usart3 {
>> status = "okay";
>> };
>>
>> -&usb0 {
>> +&ohci {
>> status = "okay";
>> num-ports = <3>;
>> };
>>
>> -&usb1 {
>> +&ehci {
>> status = "okay";
>> };
>
> And how now the sorting works? I don't get the point of it. What is
> exactly wrong in the label that justifies the code reshuffling.
>
The point is to be easy to determine what kind of standard
represents/implements the usb node.
> BTW, is this some sort of v2? If so, provide changelog and properly
> version your patches.
>
It was a new series and from now on there will be v2
BR,
Andrei Simion
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
