diff mbox series

[1/2] dt-bindings: ufs: qcom: Use 'ufshc' as the node name for UFS controller nodes

Message ID 20240514-ufs-nodename-fix-v1-1-4c55483ac401@linaro.org (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable
Headers show
Series arm64: dts: qcom: Use 'ufshc' as the node name for UFS controller nodes | expand

Commit Message

Manivannan Sadhasivam May 14, 2024, 1:08 p.m. UTC
Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.

Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Conor Dooley May 14, 2024, 6:50 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
> 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.

Can you point out where that's been documented?
Thanks,
Conor.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> index 10c146424baa..37112e17e474 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ examples:
>          #address-cells = <2>;
>          #size-cells = <2>;
>  
> -        ufs@1d84000 {
> +        ufshc@1d84000 {
>              compatible = "qcom,sm8450-ufshc", "qcom,ufshc",
>                           "jedec,ufs-2.0";
>              reg = <0 0x01d84000 0 0x3000>;
> 
> -- 
> 2.25.1
>
Manivannan Sadhasivam May 15, 2024, 7:50 a.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
> > 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.
> 
> Can you point out where that's been documented?

Typo here. s/Devicetree binding/Devicetree spec

https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#generic-names-recommendation

- Mani

> Thanks,
> Conor.
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > index 10c146424baa..37112e17e474 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
> > @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ examples:
> >          #address-cells = <2>;
> >          #size-cells = <2>;
> >  
> > -        ufs@1d84000 {
> > +        ufshc@1d84000 {
> >              compatible = "qcom,sm8450-ufshc", "qcom,ufshc",
> >                           "jedec,ufs-2.0";
> >              reg = <0 0x01d84000 0 0x3000>;
> > 
> > -- 
> > 2.25.1
> >
Krzysztof Kozlowski May 15, 2024, 8:03 a.m. UTC | #3
On 15/05/2024 09:50, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>> Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
>>> 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.
>>
>> Can you point out where that's been documented?
> 
> Typo here. s/Devicetree binding/Devicetree spec
> 
> https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#generic-names-recommendation

I read your explanation in DT spec commit:

"In a lot of places, 'ufs' is used as the node name to identify the host
    controller, but it is wrong since 'ufs' denotes 'UFS device'."

but isn't this the same as with MMC? We do not call the nodes "mmchc" or
"mmch", even though all of them are hosts, because "mmc" is the card.
The same for most of other storage devices. Or USB. The term
"controller" appears only for few cases like clocks, resets and power.

When looking at storage nodes, ufsHC is an exception here.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Conor Dooley May 15, 2024, 8:07 a.m. UTC | #4
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:50:05AM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
> > > 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.
> > 
> > Can you point out where that's been documented?
> 
> Typo here. s/Devicetree binding/Devicetree spec
> 
> https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#generic-names-recommendation

Ah, that makes sense. I grepped for it in the kernel tree and didn't see
anything so I was a bit confused..
Manivannan Sadhasivam May 15, 2024, 8:20 a.m. UTC | #5
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 10:03:36AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/05/2024 09:50, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:50:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 03:08:40PM +0200, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> >>> Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
> >>> 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.
> >>
> >> Can you point out where that's been documented?
> > 
> > Typo here. s/Devicetree binding/Devicetree spec
> > 
> > https://github.com/devicetree-org/devicetree-specification/blob/main/source/chapter2-devicetree-basics.rst#generic-names-recommendation
> 
> I read your explanation in DT spec commit:
> 
> "In a lot of places, 'ufs' is used as the node name to identify the host
>     controller, but it is wrong since 'ufs' denotes 'UFS device'."
> 
> but isn't this the same as with MMC? We do not call the nodes "mmchc" or
> "mmch", even though all of them are hosts, because "mmc" is the card.
> The same for most of other storage devices. Or USB. The term
> "controller" appears only for few cases like clocks, resets and power.
> 

The compatible for UFS HC is '*-ufshc', so it makes sense to use 'ufshc' as the
node name. But for other bus controllers like MMC, compatible just mentions
'mmc'.

And there were already nodes using both 'ufshc' and 'ufs', so I wanted to avoid
the confusion and just use 'ufshc'.

- Mani
Stephen Boyd May 15, 2024, 7:17 p.m. UTC | #6
Quoting Manivannan Sadhasivam (2024-05-14 06:08:40)
> Devicetree binding has documented the node name for UFS controllers as
> 'ufshc'. So let's use it instead of 'ufs' which is for the UFS devices.
>
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
> ---

Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
index 10c146424baa..37112e17e474 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ufs/qcom,ufs.yaml
@@ -273,7 +273,7 @@  examples:
         #address-cells = <2>;
         #size-cells = <2>;
 
-        ufs@1d84000 {
+        ufshc@1d84000 {
             compatible = "qcom,sm8450-ufshc", "qcom,ufshc",
                          "jedec,ufs-2.0";
             reg = <0 0x01d84000 0 0x3000>;