On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:57 PM Jesse Taube <mr.bossman075@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> static struct esdhc_soc_data usdhc_imx8qxp_data = {
> .flags = ESDHC_FLAG_USDHC | ESDHC_FLAG_STD_TUNING
> @@ -357,6 +363,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id imx_esdhc_dt_ids[] = {
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx7ulp-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx7ulp_data, },
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8qxp-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx8qxp_data, },
> { .compatible = "fsl,imx8mm-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imx8mm_data, },
> + { .compatible = "fsl,imxrt-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imxrt_data, },
I thought Rob suggested to use the SoC name, so this would be:
{ .compatible = "fsl,imxrt1050-usdhc", .data = &usdhc_imxrt1050_data, },
The same applies to the other bindings in the series.
This way it would be possible to differentiate between future
supported i.MX RT devices.
