Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] USB: doc: Binding document for ehci-platform driver
From: Florian Fainelli <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-24 17:37:31
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel
On Wednesday 24 October 2012 12:54:05 Alan Stern wrote:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2012, Stephen Warren wrote:quoted
Device tree files always need a completely specific value in the compatible property, even when less-specific/more-generic values are also present. So for example, the Linux driver might only care about the following existing: compatible = "usb-ehci". However, any actual EHCI controller is always some specific model, so the compatible value must define which specific model it is, e.g.: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci". Now lets say the Tegra30 EHCI controller is identical to the Tegra20 controller. That needs to be explicitly represented too: compatible = "nvidia,tegra30-ehci", "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci". In that case, the driver might still only declare support for "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", but "nvidia,tegra30-ehci" is added to be explicit about the actual HW model. This doesn't continue forever though; you typically only list the specific HW model, the base specific model it's compatible with, and any generic value needed. So, a hypothetical Tegra40 EHCI controller would be: compatible = "nvidia,tegra40-ehci", "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci". Given that, there is always something to key any newly required quirk off, so even if the need for a quirk is found later, the device tree already contains the information needed to trigger it.Okay. It appears that quite a few .dts/.dtsi files mention "usb-ehci", for no apparent reason (given that the drivers don't list it): [stern@iolanthe usb-3.6]$ find arch -name '*.dts*' | xargs grep usb-ehci arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_3xxx.dts: compatible = "cavium,octeon-6335-ehci","usb-ehci"; arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon_68xx.dts: compatible = "cavium,octeon-6335-ehci","usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20.dtsi: compatible = "nvidia,tegra20-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9x5.dtsi: compatible = "atmel,at91sam9g45-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/spear13xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/spear3xx.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/spear600.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/spear600.dtsi: compatible = "st,spear600-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/arm/boot/dts/at91sam9g45.dtsi: compatible = "atmel,at91sam9g45-ehci", "usb-ehci"; arch/powerpc/boot/dts/wii.dts: compatible = "nintendo,hollywood-usb-ehci", arch/powerpc/boot/dts/wii.dts: "usb-ehci"; arch/powerpc/boot/dts/sequoia.dts: compatible = "ibm,usb-ehci-440epx", "usb-ehci"; arch/powerpc/boot/dts/canyonlands.dts: compatible = "ibm,usb-ehci-460ex", "usb-ehci"; Is there a real reason that I'm not aware of? Or can all these entries safely be removed?
Apart from the powerpc entries for which a real driver exists, the others were probably added in the hope that sooner or later, someone will come up with a matching driver, and the corresponding dts file would not even have to be updated to benefit from this. -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html