Remove "snps,dwc2" from hsotg@12480000 node compatible list because
"samsung,s3c6400-hsotg" should be enough.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
index b016b0b68306..d4866269f4ee 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
@@ -362,7 +362,7 @@
};
hsotg: hsotg@12480000 {
- compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg", "snps,dwc2";
+ compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg";
reg = <0x12480000 0x20000>;
interrupts = <GIC_SPI 141 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
clocks = <&cmu CLK_USBOTG>;
--
2.15.0
On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:35:36AM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
> Remove "snps,dwc2" from hsotg@12480000 node compatible list because
> "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg" should be enough.
The more detailed compatible is almost always "enough". Some other nodes
also have detailed+generic compatible. In this case there is a driver
matching "snps,dwc2" so why removing it?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> index b016b0b68306..d4866269f4ee 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
> @@ -362,7 +362,7 @@
> };
>
> hsotg: hsotg@12480000 {
> - compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg", "snps,dwc2";
> + compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg";
> reg = <0x12480000 0x20000>;
> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 141 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> clocks = <&cmu CLK_USBOTG>;
> --
> 2.15.0
>
On 12/30/19 4:37 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:35:36AM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
>> Remove "snps,dwc2" from hsotg@12480000 node compatible list because
>> "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg" should be enough.
> The more detailed compatible is almost always "enough". Some other nodes
> also have detailed+generic compatible. In this case there is a driver
> matching "snps,dwc2" so why removing it?
First because, unlike the others dwc2 devices, this compatible wasn't
describe in the bindings file
so I had to investigated how it should work and, on samsung DT files,
only "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg".
From driver code point of view that seems coherent (we do the same for
stm32).
With that in mind I have decided to remove "snps,dwc2" from exynos DT
file rather than add it everywhere else.
Benjamin
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
>> index b016b0b68306..d4866269f4ee 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos3250.dtsi
>> @@ -362,7 +362,7 @@
>> };
>>
>> hsotg: hsotg@12480000 {
>> - compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg", "snps,dwc2";
>> + compatible = "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg";
>> reg = <0x12480000 0x20000>;
>> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 141 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> clocks = <&cmu CLK_USBOTG>;
>> --
>> 2.15.0
>>
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 08:50:39AM +0000, Benjamin GAIGNARD wrote:
>
> On 12/30/19 4:37 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 11:35:36AM +0100, Benjamin Gaignard wrote:
> >> Remove "snps,dwc2" from hsotg@12480000 node compatible list because
> >> "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg" should be enough.
> > The more detailed compatible is almost always "enough". Some other nodes
> > also have detailed+generic compatible. In this case there is a driver
> > matching "snps,dwc2" so why removing it?
>
> First because, unlike the others dwc2 devices, this compatible wasn't
> describe in the bindings file
>
> so I had to investigated how it should work and, on samsung DT files,
> only "samsung,s3c6400-hsotg".
>
> From driver code point of view that seems coherent (we do the same for
> stm32).
>
> With that in mind I have decided to remove "snps,dwc2" from exynos DT
> file rather than add it everywhere else.
>
Actually fine with me, although I would be happy if Rob or Mark could
confirm that it is a preferred approach.
Rob, Mark, could you share your thoughts?
Best regards,
Krzysztof