On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:37 AM Shawn Lin [off-list ref] wrote:

On 2021/3/10 15:00, Johan Jonker wrote:

quoted

On 3/10/21 4:01 AM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Mar 09, 2021 at 09:56:29AM +0800, Shawn Lin wrote:

quoted

This patch adds rockchip support in sdhci-of-dwcmhsc.yaml

Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>
---

Changes in v3: None

  .../bindings/mmc/snps,dwcmshc-sdhci.yaml           | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++
  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/snps,dwcmshc-sdhci.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/snps,dwcmshc-sdhci.yaml
index f99fb9f..43989f2 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/snps,dwcmshc-sdhci.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/snps,dwcmshc-sdhci.yaml

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ allOf:
  properties:
    compatible:
      enum:

quoted

quoted

+      - rockchip,dwcmshc-sdhci

Compatible strings are supposed to be SoC orientated.
What SoC was this change for? rk3568 ?
Could Shawn confirm that?

Yes. We are inclined to use this controller from now on for a
long time for up-coming SoCs. Should we tag compatible for rk3568
specified? One of the negative things I could come up with is that we
do this for dwmmc-rockchip, but we end up doing nothing else,
except for adding new compatible string again and again in Document.

Yes, you should make this SoC specific.

It's one line patches if nothing else changed.

quoted

          - rockchip,rk3568-dwcmshc-sdhci ??

I'd shorten it to 'rockchip,rk3568-dwcmshc'.

quoted

Could Rob advise here?