On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 02:33:10PM +0000, Chris Brandt wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Chris Brandt
> > <chris.brandt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/r7s72100-rskrza1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r7s72100-rskrza1.dts
> > > > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r7s72100-rskrza1.dts
> > > > index e5dea5b..548b51f 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/r7s72100-rskrza1.dts
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/r7s72100-rskrza1.dts
> > > > @@ -56,6 +56,10 @@
> > > > };
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > +&sdhi1 {
> > > > + status = "okay";
> > >
> > > On all other boards, we have the bus-width property in the
> > > board-specific .dts instead of in the SoC-specific .dtsi.
>
> I did see that.
> But, in my opinion, using 4-bit SDHI is way more common that 1-bit SDHI.
> So I figured I'd make 4-bit the 'default' by putting it in the dtsi, and if for some reason someone needed 1-bit, they could override it in the board .dts.
>
>
> > I'd like us to be consistent as much as possible.
> > But I do wonder why it has been added as a board property.
>
> It doesn't really matter to me. If you want me to move it to the board dts it to keep it consistent, just let me know and I'll change it.
Please do.
