Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <5676bcd2-14fc-4e1d-643e-89e575d190c3@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 28 Oct 2022 07:27:09 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] arm64: tegra: Enable XUSB host and device on Jetson
 AGX Orin
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, Wayne Chang <waynec@nvidia.com>,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, treding@nvidia.com,
        thierry.reding@gmail.com, heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com,
        ajayg@nvidia.com, kishon@ti.com, vkoul@kernel.org,
        p.zabel@pengutronix.de, balbi@kernel.org, mathias.nyman@intel.com,
        jckuo@nvidia.com
Cc:     linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, singhanc@nvidia.com,
        linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org
References: <20221024074128.1113554-1-waynec@nvidia.com>
 <20221024074128.1113554-5-waynec@nvidia.com>
 <2059dfe5-b084-42a4-7f35-9da9561fc12b@linaro.org>
 <b803bcf9-fc47-5239-ffe9-707925f324de@nvidia.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <b803bcf9-fc47-5239-ffe9-707925f324de@nvidia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 28/10/2022 05:33, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>> +			ucsi_ccg: ucsi_ccg@8 {
>>
>> No underscores in node names.
>>
>>> +				compatible = "cypress,cypd4226";
>>> +				cypress,firmware-build = "gn";
>>> +				interrupt-parent = <&gpio>;
>>> +				interrupts = <TEGRA234_MAIN_GPIO(Y, 4) IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW>;
>>> +				reg = <0x08>;
>>> +				status = "okay";
>>
>> The pattern of redefining full path in Tegra is confusing - I have no
>> clue which of these status=okay are correct which are redundant.
>>
>> Do you?
> 
> I understand you may not like this approach, however, this comment is 
> not really relevant to just this patch, but a general comment. But yes 
> we will ensure that this is correct.
> 

Just to clarify - this status looks redundant, but I have no way to tell
for sure...

Best regards,
Krzysztof