On 15 January 2015 at 17:58, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Ulf, > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 01:02:08PM +0000, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> The simple MMC power sequence provider, intends to supports a set of >> common properties between SOC designs. It thus enables us to re-use the >> same provider for several SOCs. >> >> In this initial step, let's add the top level description of the MMC >> power sequence and describe the compatible string for the simple MMC >> power sequence provider. >> >> Following patches will step by step add support for new properties to >> the simple MMC power sequence provider. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> >> Changes in v2: >> - None. >> >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc,pwrseq-simple.txt | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc.txt | 5 +++++ >> 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc,pwrseq-simple.txt >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc,pwrseq-simple.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc,pwrseq-simple.txt >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..e1b7f9c >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc,pwrseq-simple.txt >> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ >> +* The simple MMC power sequence provider >> + >> +System on chip designs may specify a specific MMC power sequence. To >> +successfully detect an (e)MMC/SD/SDIO card, that power sequence must be >> +maintained while initializing the card. >> + >> +The simple MMC power sequence provider, intends to supports a set of common >> +properties between SOC designs. It thus enables us to re-use the same provider >> +for several SOC designs. >> + >> +Required properties: >> +- compatible : contains "mmc,pwrseq-simple". > > Nit: "mmc" is not a vendor prefix. > >> + >> +Example: >> + >> + sdhci0_pwrseq { >> + compatible = "mmc,pwrseq-simple"; >> + } > > I'm a little confused here. What specific sequence is described by this > node? We don't appear to have referred to any resources used as part of > that sequence, and the description above only mentions that there could > be a specific sequence, not what that sequence is. > > So I don't think this makes sense on its own, and should probably be > folded with patches adding the initial support for the resources used as > part of the sequence (e.g. the GPIOs added in a later patch). You are absolutely right. I fix it. Again, thanks for reviewing. Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html