On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:43 AM, <ygardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >>> This change turns the UFS variant (SCSI_UFS_QCOM) into a UFS >>> a platform device. >>> In order to do so a few additional changes are required: >>> 1. The ufshcd-pltfrm is no longer serves as a platform device. >>> Now it only serves as a group of platform APIs such as PM APIs >>> (runtime suspend/resume, system suspend/resume etc), parsers of >>> clocks, regulators and pm_levels from DT. >>> 2. What used to be the old platform "probe" is now "only" >>> a pltfrm_init() routine, that does exactly the same, but only >>> being called by the new probe function of the UFS variant. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt | 2 +- >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 78 >>> +++++++++++++++++- >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c | 92 >>> ++++++---------------- >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.h | 41 ++++++++++ >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 10 +++ >>> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.h | 1 + >>> 6 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.h >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt >>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt >>> index 5357919..b39e765 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt >>> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ UFSHC nodes are defined to describe on-chip UFS host >>> controllers. >>> Each UFS controller instance should have its own node. >>> >>> Required properties: >>> -- compatible : compatible list, contains "jedec,ufs-1.1" >>> +- compatible : compatible list, contains "jedec,ufs-1.1" or >>> "qcom,ufshc" >> >> Replying again as I inadvertently dropped everyone. >> >> This should also have a more specific compatible string with the SOC >> name/number in it. It may be "the same in all SOCs", but there is >> always the possibility for bugs/limitations to be found that are >> specific to an SOC even if all RTL versions are identical (e.g. >> different max clock speeds). It is about making the dtb future proof, >> not about what exactly you need today. You can keep qcom,ufshc for >> driver matching if you want. > > I see your point. > I just would like to make sure, syntactically speaking, if what you mean > should look like: > > compatible : compatible list, contains "jedec,ufs-1.1" or > "qcom,ufshc" for msm8994, msm8996 SOCs. No, you need actual compatible strings: contains one of: "jedec,ufs-1.1" "qcom,msm8994-ufshc" or "qcom,msm8996-ufshc" followed by "qcom,ufshc" Really, we should probably never had allowed "jedec,ufs-1.1" by itself. >>> - interrupts : <interrupt mapping for UFS host controller IRQ> >>> - reg : <registers mapping> >> >> What about phy properties? No Unipro PHY block that requires setup? >> > > yes, i will add another documentation file for it. And you need the "phy" property here with the phandle to the phy node. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
