[PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.

This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
[PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
available at:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html

Vivek Gautam (2):
  usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
  usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

 drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
 drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
 drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.6.5

--
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

[PATCH 1/2] usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
device by using older string in the compatible list.

Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
---
 drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
 drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
index 319dcfa..f18e6ac 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
@@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops s5p_ehci_pm_ops = {
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_OF
 static const struct of_device_id exynos_ehci_match[] = {
-	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ehci" },
+	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ehci" },
 	{},
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ehci_match);
diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
index aa3b884..77f2017 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
@@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos_ohci_pm_ops = {
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_OF
 static const struct of_device_id exynos_ohci_match[] = {
-	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ohci" },
+	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ohci" },
 	{},
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ohci_match);
-- 
1.7.6.5

Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
> Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
> device by using older string in the compatible list.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
> index 319dcfa..f18e6ac 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
> @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops s5p_ehci_pm_ops = {
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_ehci_match[] = {
> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ehci" },
> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ehci" },
>         {},
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ehci_match);
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
> index aa3b884..77f2017 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
> @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos_ohci_pm_ops = {
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_ohci_match[] = {
> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ohci" },
> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ohci" },
>         {},
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ohci_match);
> --
> 1.7.6.5
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

CC: Doug Anderson


On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
>> Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
>> device by using older string in the compatible list.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
>> index 319dcfa..f18e6ac 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c
>> @@ -266,7 +266,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops s5p_ehci_pm_ops = {
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_ehci_match[] = {
>> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ehci" },
>> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ehci" },
>>         {},
>>  };
>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ehci_match);
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
>> index aa3b884..77f2017 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c
>> @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos_ohci_pm_ops = {
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_ohci_match[] = {
>> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-ohci" },
>> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos4210-ohci" },
>>         {},
>>  };
>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_ohci_match);
>> --
>> 1.7.6.5
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Vivek



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

[PATCH 2/2] usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
device by using older string in the compatible list.

Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
---
 drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
index aae5328..9dce99a 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
@@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_OF
 static const struct of_device_id exynos_dwc3_match[] = {
-	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
+	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
 	{},
 };
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_dwc3_match);
-- 
1.7.6.5

--
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

Re: [PATCH 2/2] usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

CC: LKML

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
> Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
> device by using older string in the compatible list.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> index aae5328..9dce99a 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_dwc3_match[] = {
> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
>         {},
>  };
>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_dwc3_match);
> --
> 1.7.6.5
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

Re: [PATCH 2/2] usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

[Vivek Gautam]

CC: Doug Anderson


On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
> CC: LKML
>
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
>> Using specific chip in compatible strings. Newer SOCs can claim
>> device by using older string in the compatible list.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
>> index aae5328..9dce99a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
>> @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>  static const struct of_device_id exynos_dwc3_match[] = {
>> -       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> +       { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
>>         {},
>>  };
>>  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_dwc3_match);
>> --
>> 1.7.6.5
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Vivek



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Grant Likely]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
> 
> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
> available at:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
> 
> Vivek Gautam (2):
>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device

for both patches:
Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>

> 
>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> -- 
> 1.7.6.5
> 

-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc, P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies, Ltd.
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

CC: Doug Anderson


On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Grant Likely
<grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
>> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
>> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
>>
>> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
>> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
>> available at:
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
>>
>> Vivek Gautam (2):
>>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>
> for both patches:
> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
>
>>
>>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> 1.7.6.5
>>
>
> --
> Grant Likely, B.Sc, P.Eng.
> Secret Lab Technologies, Ltd.
> --
> 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



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi all,


On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> CC: Doug Anderson
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Grant Likely
> <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
>>> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
>>> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
>>>
>>> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
>>> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
>>> available at:
>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
>>>
>>> Vivek Gautam (2):
>>>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>>>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>>
>> for both patches:
>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
>>

Any more thought about this patch-set?
Or does this change seems fine?

>>>
>>>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>>>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>>>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> --
>>> 1.7.6.5
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Grant Likely, B.Sc, P.Eng.
>> Secret Lab Technologies, Ltd.
>> --
>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> Vivek



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Doug Anderson]

On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Vivek Gautam
<gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Grant Likely
>> <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
>>>> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
>>>> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
>>>>
>>>> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
>>>> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
>>>> available at:
>>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
>>>>
>>>> Vivek Gautam (2):
>>>>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>>>>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>>>
>>> for both patches:
>>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
>>>
>
> Any more thought about this patch-set?
> Or does this change seems fine?

These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:

Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>

RE: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Kukjin Kim]

Kukjin Kim wrote:
> 
Re-sending due to e-mail client problem...

> Doug Anderson wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Vivek Gautam
> > <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Vivek Gautam
> > <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Grant Likely
> > >> <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam
> > <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
> > >>>> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
> > >>>> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
> > >>>> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
> > >>>> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
> > >>>> available at:
> > >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Vivek Gautam (2):
> > >>>>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
> > >>>>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
> > >>>
> > >>> for both patches:
> > >>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
> > >>>
> > >
> > > Any more thought about this patch-set?
> > > Or does this change seems fine?
> >
> > These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
> 
> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be used.
But
> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another confusion
> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver like
> following?
> 
> -	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> +	{ .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
> 
> Or if any version or something, how about following?
> 
> +	{ .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
> 
> - Kukjin

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi Kukjin,


On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>
> Re-sending due to e-mail client problem...
>
>> Doug Anderson wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Vivek Gautam
>> > <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:16 PM, Vivek Gautam
>> > <gautamvivek1987@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Grant Likely
>> > >> <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
>> > >>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2012 20:22:26 +0530, Vivek Gautam
>> > <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
>> > >>>> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
>> > >>>> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
>> > >>>> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
>> > >>>> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
>> > >>>> available at:
>> > >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Vivek Gautam (2):
>> > >>>>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>> > >>>>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>> > >>>
>> > >>> for both patches:
>> > >>> Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
>> > >>>
>> > >
>> > > Any more thought about this patch-set?
>> > > Or does this change seems fine?
>> >
>> > These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>>
>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be used.
> But
>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another confusion
>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver like
>> following?
>>
>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
>>
>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
>>
>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
>>
Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
confusion, but won't it be fine that -
"Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant Likely

Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
SoC specific
in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
compatible
for newer SoCs also. Like,

-     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
+     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
+     { .compatible = <new SoC using same IP> },

>> - Kukjin
>



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 12/24/2012 09:13 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>>> These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org>
>>>
>>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be used.
>> But
>>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another confusion
>>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
>>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver like
>>> following?
>>>
>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
>>>
>>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
>>>
>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
>>>
> Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
> confusion, but won't it be fine that -
> "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
> including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant Likely
>
> Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
> SoC specific
> in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
> compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
>
> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
> +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },

Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I believe
IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each instance.
I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
seems more clear to me.

--

Thanks,
Sylwester

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Sylwester Nawrocki
<sylvester.nawrocki-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> On 12/24/2012 09:13 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
>>>>>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be
>>>> used.
>>>
>>> But
>>>>
>>>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another
>>>> confusion
>>>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
>>>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver
>>>> like
>>>> following?
>>>>
>>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
>>>>
>>>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
>>>>
>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
>>>>
>> Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
>> confusion, but won't it be fine that -
>> "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
>> including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant
>> Likely
>>
>> Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
>> SoC specific
>> in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
>> compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
>>
>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
>> +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },
>
>
> Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I believe
> IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
> instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
> be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each instance.
> I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
> to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
> seems more clear to me.
>

Ping !!


-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek
--
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

RE: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Kukjin Kim]

Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> 
> On 12/24/2012 09:13 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> >>>> These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders-F7+t8E8rja9g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org>
> >>>
> >>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be
used.
> >> But
> >>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another
> confusion
> >>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
> >>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver
> like
> >>> following?
> >>>
> >>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
> >>>
> >>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
> >>>
> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
> >>>
> > Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
> > confusion, but won't it be fine that -
> > "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
> > including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant
Likely
> >
> > Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
> > SoC specific
> > in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
> > compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
> >
> > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> > +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
> > +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },
> 
> Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I
believe
> IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
> instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
> be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each
instance.
> I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
> to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
> seems more clear to me.
> 
Well, I don't think so. Let's see the DMAC PL330. Its compatible is
"arm,pl330" and "arm,primecell" not SoC/Chip name. I think DWC is a same
case or at least similar.

You know, the DWC is a IP from Synopsis and I _Believe_ it has a kind of
version and it can be used for identify.

Thanks.

- Kukjin

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi Kukjin,


On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>>
>> On 12/24/2012 09:13 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>> >>>> These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org>
>> >>>
>> >>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be
> used.
>> >> But
>> >>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another
>> confusion
>> >>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
>> >>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver
>> like
>> >>> following?
>> >>>
>> >>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
>> >>>
>> >>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
>> >>>
>> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
>> >>>
>> > Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
>> > confusion, but won't it be fine that -
>> > "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
>> > including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant
> Likely
>> >
>> > Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
>> > SoC specific
>> > in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
>> > compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
>> >
>> > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> > +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
>> > +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },
>>
>> Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I
> believe
>> IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
>> instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
>> be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each
> instance.
>> I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
>> to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
>> seems more clear to me.
>>
> Well, I don't think so. Let's see the DMAC PL330. Its compatible is
> "arm,pl330" and "arm,primecell" not SoC/Chip name. I think DWC is a same
> case or at least similar.
>
> You know, the DWC is a IP from Synopsis and I _Believe_ it has a kind of
> version and it can be used for identify.
>

Right, DWC has version number, but that being the kind of USB controller
(USB 2.0 and USB 3.0)

DWC2: USB High Speed controller (as also indicated in the patch from
Paul: [RFC PATCH 0/6] DWC2 DesignWare HS OTG driver)
DWC3: USB Super Speed controller

Is it fine if we use something like shown below, as suggested by you earlier ?

-     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
+     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }




-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Felipe Balbi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3421 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:18:55AM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> > Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/24/2012 09:13 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
> >> >>>> These two changes look good to me.  For both of them:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Reviewed-by: Doug Anderson<dianders@chromium.org>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Well, I have another idea. Yes, I know, specific chip name should be
> > used.
> >> >> But
> >> >>> you know the specific chip name in compatible can cause another
> >> confusion
> >> >>> on other SoC which has same IP. So I think, we need to consider to use
> >> >>> common name or any specific name not chip in compatible for IP/driver
> >> like
> >> >>> following?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> >> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
> >> >>>
> >> > Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
> >> > confusion, but won't it be fine that -
> >> > "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
> >> > including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant
> > Likely
> >> >
> >> > Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
> >> > SoC specific
> >> > in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
> >> > compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
> >> >
> >> > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> >> > +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
> >> > +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },
> >>
> >> Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I
> > believe
> >> IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
> >> instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
> >> be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each
> > instance.
> >> I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
> >> to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
> >> seems more clear to me.
> >>
> > Well, I don't think so. Let's see the DMAC PL330. Its compatible is
> > "arm,pl330" and "arm,primecell" not SoC/Chip name. I think DWC is a same
> > case or at least similar.
> >
> > You know, the DWC is a IP from Synopsis and I _Believe_ it has a kind of
> > version and it can be used for identify.
> >
> 
> Right, DWC has version number, but that being the kind of USB controller
> (USB 2.0 and USB 3.0)
> 
> DWC2: USB High Speed controller (as also indicated in the patch from
> Paul: [RFC PATCH 0/6] DWC2 DesignWare HS OTG driver)
> DWC3: USB Super Speed controller
> 
> Is it fine if we use something like shown below, as suggested by you earlier ?
> 
> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }

You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
(dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.

The glue layer is just to "abstract" away the integration details of the
IP core into a specific platform.

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

RE: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Kukjin Kim]

Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
Hi Felipe,

[...]

> > Right, DWC has version number, but that being the kind of USB controller
> > (USB 2.0 and USB 3.0)
> >
> > DWC2: USB High Speed controller (as also indicated in the patch from
> > Paul: [RFC PATCH 0/6] DWC2 DesignWare HS OTG driver)
> > DWC3: USB Super Speed controller
> >
> > Is it fine if we use something like shown below, as suggested by you
earlier ?
> >
> > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> > +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }
> 
> You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
> dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
> (dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
> samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.
> 
Hmm...yeah, you're right and agreed.

However, we need to use more clear name there like "samsung,exynos-dwusb3"
in compatible, because you know there are lots of other IPs in Synopsis
Design Ware brand. So we have to include usb in compatible for that.

> The glue layer is just to "abstract" away the integration details of the
> IP core into a specific platform.
> 
Right.

Thanks.

- Kukjin

--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Felipe Balbi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1208 bytes --]

Hi,

On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:04:56PM -0800, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> Hi Felipe,
> 
> [...]
> 
> > > Right, DWC has version number, but that being the kind of USB controller
> > > (USB 2.0 and USB 3.0)
> > >
> > > DWC2: USB High Speed controller (as also indicated in the patch from
> > > Paul: [RFC PATCH 0/6] DWC2 DesignWare HS OTG driver)
> > > DWC3: USB Super Speed controller
> > >
> > > Is it fine if we use something like shown below, as suggested by you
> earlier ?
> > >
> > > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
> > > +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }
> > 
> > You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
> > dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
> > (dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
> > samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.
> > 
> Hmm...yeah, you're right and agreed.
> 
> However, we need to use more clear name there like "samsung,exynos-dwusb3"
> in compatible, because you know there are lots of other IPs in Synopsis
> Design Ware brand. So we have to include usb in compatible for that.

fair enough.

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi all,


On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 3:20 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 02:04:56PM -0800, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> Hi Felipe,
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> > > Right, DWC has version number, but that being the kind of USB controller
>> > > (USB 2.0 and USB 3.0)
>> > >
>> > > DWC2: USB High Speed controller (as also indicated in the patch from
>> > > Paul: [RFC PATCH 0/6] DWC2 DesignWare HS OTG driver)
>> > > DWC3: USB Super Speed controller
>> > >
>> > > Is it fine if we use something like shown below, as suggested by you
>> earlier ?
>> > >
>> > > -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>> > > +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }
>> >
>> > You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
>> > dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
>> > (dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
>> > samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.
>> >
>> Hmm...yeah, you're right and agreed.
>>
>> However, we need to use more clear name there like "samsung,exynos-dwusb3"
>> in compatible, because you know there are lots of other IPs in Synopsis
>> Design Ware brand. So we have to include usb in compatible for that.
>
> fair enough.
>

Thanks for your suggestions. This definitely make things clear.
I shall then keep "samsung,exynos-dwusb3" as the compatible string or,
should i be including '5250' string as well, something like
"samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3"
as pointed out by Grant earlier ?  :-O


-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

Hi,

On 01/23/2013 01:20 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }
>>>>
>>>> You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
>>>> dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
>>>> (dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
>>>> samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.
>>>>
>>> Hmm...yeah, you're right and agreed.
>>>
>>> However, we need to use more clear name there like "samsung,exynos-dwusb3"
>>> in compatible, because you know there are lots of other IPs in Synopsis
>>> Design Ware brand. So we have to include usb in compatible for that.
>>
>> fair enough.
>>
> 
> Thanks for your suggestions. This definitely make things clear.
> I shall then keep "samsung,exynos-dwusb3" as the compatible string or,
> should i be including '5250' string as well, something like
> "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3"
> as pointed out by Grant earlier ?  :-O

IMHO this needs to be "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3", rather than 
"samsung,exynos-dwusb3". :)

--

Thanks,
Sylwester

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

Hi Sylwester,


On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki
<s.nawrocki-Sze3O3UU22JBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/23/2013 01:20 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>>>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" }
>>>>>
>>>>> You're both missing a point here. The synopsys IP driver is called
>>>>> dwc3.ko and that's compatible with synopsys,dwc3. Your glue layer driver
>>>>> (dwc3-exynos.ko) is compatible with your platform, so
>>>>> samsung,exynos-dwc3 sounds correct to me.
>>>>>
>>>> Hmm...yeah, you're right and agreed.
>>>>
>>>> However, we need to use more clear name there like "samsung,exynos-dwusb3"
>>>> in compatible, because you know there are lots of other IPs in Synopsis
>>>> Design Ware brand. So we have to include usb in compatible for that.
>>>
>>> fair enough.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for your suggestions. This definitely make things clear.
>> I shall then keep "samsung,exynos-dwusb3" as the compatible string or,
>> should i be including '5250' string as well, something like
>> "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3"
>> as pointed out by Grant earlier ?  :-O
>
> IMHO this needs to be "samsung,exynos5250-dwusb3", rather than
> "samsung,exynos-dwusb3". :)
>

Alright, thanks.
I shall update this patch.  :)


-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

On 01/22/2013 06:35 AM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,synopsis-dwc3" },
>>>>>
>>>>> Or if any version or something, how about following?
>>>>>
>>>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,dwc-v3" },
>>>>>
>>> Well, yes the newer SoCs with same IP using the chip name can cause some
>>> confusion, but won't it be fine that -
>>> "Newer parts using the same core can claim compatibility by
>>> including the older string in the compatible list" - as quoted by Grant
> Likely
>>>
>>> Or, can we try another option, using multiple compatible strings for
>>> SoC specific
>>> in of_match_table, so that we don't create any confusion by using same
>>> compatible for newer SoCs also. Like,
>>>
>>> -     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos-dwc3" },
>>> +     { .compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc3" },
>>> +     { .compatible =<new SoC using same IP>  },
>>
>> Yes, why not just use an SoC name where given IP first appeared ? I
> believe
>> IP revision numbers are not always well documented. Also when an IP is
>> instantiated multiple times in specific SoC, its revision number might not
>> be sufficient to determine the system integration details for each
> instance.
>> I think having version for some devices and SoC name for others just adds
>> to the confusion. Thus using specific chip name in the compatible property
>> seems more clear to me.
>>
> Well, I don't think so. Let's see the DMAC PL330. Its compatible is
> "arm,pl330" and "arm,primecell" not SoC/Chip name. I think DWC is a same
> case or at least similar.
> 
> You know, the DWC is a IP from Synopsis and I _Believe_ it has a kind of
> version and it can be used for identify.

That's a good point, but isn't DesignWare just a name of a family of IP
cores from Synopsys [1] ? And what would DWC be supposed to signify ?
DesignWare Controller ? Wouldn't that be too generic ? Synopsys seems
to offer multiple different controllers and any of them could eventually
end up in a specific SoC [2].

Maybe the compatible property should be something like:

compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-dwc-3", "synopsys,dw-usb-3";
or
compatible = "samsung,exynos5250-usb3", "synopsys,dw-ss-usb3";

? Or anything more specific in the synopsys part to indicate which
exactly USB controller IP is used ?

[1] http://www.synopsys.com/IP/InterfaceIP/USB/Pages/default.aspx
[2] http://www.synopsys.com/IP/InterfaceIP/Pages/default.aspx

--

Regards,
Sylwester
--
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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] usb: exynos: Fix compatible strings used for device

[Vivek Gautam]

CC: LKML

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@samsung.com> wrote:
> Using chip specific compatible string as it should be.
> So fixing this for ehci-s5p, ohci-exynos and dwc3-exynos
> which till now used a generic 'exynos' in their compatible strings.
>
> This goes as per the discussion happened in the thread for
> [PATCH v2] ARM: Exynos5250: Enabling dwc3-exynos driver
> available at:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg74145.html
>
> Vivek Gautam (2):
>   usb: ehci-s5p/ohci-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>   usb: dwc3-exynos: Fix compatible strings for the device
>
>  drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  drivers/usb/host/ehci-s5p.c    |    2 +-
>  drivers/usb/host/ohci-exynos.c |    2 +-
>  3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 1.7.6.5
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Thanks & Regards
Vivek