> 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. > The "phy" properties will be updated in V8 i'm about to uploade > Rob > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- 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
