Hi Geert,

On Wednesday, November 14, 2018, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

quoted

 Required properties:
-- compatible: "renesas,usb2-phy-r8a774a1" if the device is a part of an

R8A774A1

quoted

+- compatible: "renesas,usb2-phy-r7s9210" if the device is a part of an

R7S9210

quoted

+             SoC.
+             "renesas,usb2-phy-r8a774a1" if the device is a part of an

R8A774A1

quoted

              SoC.
              "renesas,usb2-phy-r8a7795" if the device is a part of an

R8A7795

quoted

              SoC.

@@ -16,8 +18,8 @@ Required properties:
              R8A77990 SoC.
              "renesas,usb2-phy-r8a77995" if the device is a part of an
              R8A77995 SoC.
-             "renesas,rcar-gen3-usb2-phy" for a generic R-Car Gen3 or

RZ/G2

quoted

-             compatible device.
+             "renesas,rcar-gen3-usb2-phy" for a generic R-Car Gen3,

RZ/G2 or

quoted

+             RZ/A2 compatible device.

Is it a good idea to declare RZ/A2 compatible to R-Car Gen3?
Usually we don't do that for Renesas IP cores used in different
families[*].
Of course, I know you do have a good relationship with the actual RZ/A2
hardware designers ;-)

In light of Shimoda-san's comment w.r.t. R-Car H3 USB port1 in the driver
code, perhaps "renesas,rcar-gen3-usb2-phy" should not be used?

Well, I think the IP block seems the same....however...
I did point out that the COMMCTRL register defaults to a different 
value. No idea why that is. Honestly, I did not go and check all the other 
registers bits. So I guess I wonder what "compatible" really means:

"Compatible: Different, but close enough that it will work" ???

Chris