On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Bu Tao <butao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 在 2017/6/22 19:51, Arnd Bergmann 写道:
>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:44 PM, Bu Tao <butao@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 在 2017/6/17 5:51, Arnd Bergmann 写道:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Bu Tao <butao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> I do not know wheher other SoC need to use the optional properties as
>>> abover. So here the name of the optional properties has "hi3660".
>>
>>
>> They should not have "hi3660" in their names either way, independent
>> of where they are used.
>
>
> Oh, change the "hi3660" to "hisilicon"?
> e.g. ufs-hi3660-use-rate-B --> ufs-hisilicon-use-rate-B
No, just 'use-rate-B', no prefix for this.
>>>> (note: this is different from the value of the "compatible" property
>>>> that
>>>> is meant to be as specific as possible".
>>>>
>>>> Also, please clarify how your binding relates to the ufshcd binding
>>>> in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt: does
>>>> hi3660 implement any registers that are shared with ufshcd, or does
>>>> it use the same physical interface with a different register set?
>>>
>>>
>>> No, only show how to use the dt-binding for hi3660 SoC
>>
>>
>> My question was about the hardware: does hi3660 implement ufshcd
>> or not?
>
>
> YES
Ok, then the properties should be documented as optional in the
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt file for anything
that has a proper interpretation in the context of the generic ufshcd
driver.
Arnd
