| Message ID | 1377160283-26934-1-git-send-email-kishon@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a > compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible > types for backward compatibility. > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt > PALMAS USB COMPARATOR > Required Properties: > - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" > + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and > + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed?
Hi, On Friday 23 August 2013 02:20 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a >> compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible >> types for backward compatibility. > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt > >> PALMAS USB COMPARATOR >> Required Properties: >> - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" >> + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and >> + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. > > So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. yeah. > > Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need yeah, it should be added too. > SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific > bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed? hmm.. Palmas is external to SoC. So not sure if adding SoC specific compatible values is such a good idea. Thanks Kishon
On 08/23/2013 05:28 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > Hi, > > On Friday 23 August 2013 02:20 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>> The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a >>> compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible >>> types for backward compatibility. >> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt >> >>> PALMAS USB COMPARATOR >>> Required Properties: >>> - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" >>> + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and >>> + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. >> >> So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. > > yeah. >> >> Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need > > yeah, it should be added too. >> SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific >> bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed? > > hmm.. Palmas is external to SoC. So not sure if adding SoC specific compatible > values is such a good idea. In this case, but SoC, I meant the Palmas chip rather than the application processor. Is twl6035 a name for Palmas or something else?
On Saturday 24 August 2013 12:47 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/23/2013 05:28 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Friday 23 August 2013 02:20 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 08/22/2013 02:31 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: >>>> The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a >>>> compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible >>>> types for backward compatibility. >>> >>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt >>> >>>> PALMAS USB COMPARATOR >>>> Required Properties: >>>> - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" >>>> + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and >>>> + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. >>> >>> So this defines one new value and deprecates the two old values. >> >> yeah. >>> >>> Why isn't a new "ti,twl6035-usb-vid" entry useful? Don't you still need >> >> yeah, it should be added too. >>> SoC-specific compatible values so the driver can enable any SoC-specific >>> bug-fixes/workarounds later if needed? >> >> hmm.. Palmas is external to SoC. So not sure if adding SoC specific compatible >> values is such a good idea. > > In this case, but SoC, I meant the Palmas chip rather than the > application processor. Is twl6035 a name for Palmas or something else? yeah, tw6035 is a name for palmas. Thanks Kishon
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt index 7dab6a8..dc5fab3 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt @@ -2,7 +2,8 @@ EXTCON FOR PALMAS/TWL CHIPS PALMAS USB COMPARATOR Required Properties: - - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb" or "ti,twl6035-usb" + - compatible : Should be "ti,palmas-usb-vid". "ti,twl6035-usb" and + "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated and is kept for backward compatibility. Optional Properties: - ti,wakeup : To enable the wakeup comparator in probe diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c index 89fdd05..9672f31 100644 --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c @@ -268,6 +268,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops palmas_pm_ops = { static struct of_device_id of_palmas_match_tbl[] = { { .compatible = "ti,palmas-usb", }, + { .compatible = "ti,palmas-usb-vid", }, { .compatible = "ti,twl6035-usb", }, { /* end */ } };
The Palmas device contains only a USB VBUS-ID detector, so added a compatible type *ti,palmas-usb-vid*. Didn't remove the existing compatible types for backward compatibility. Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com> --- Changes from v3: * Fixed commit log message (VID to VBUS-ID). * Fixed the Documentation to tell "ti,twl6035-usb" and "ti,palmas-usb" is deprecated Changes from [1]: * Since the old compatible values will be in 3.11 kernel, we shouldn't remove the old compatible values. So retain the old compatible values. [1] -> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg95843.html Documentation/devicetree/bindings/extcon/extcon-palmas.txt | 3 ++- drivers/extcon/extcon-palmas.c | 1 + 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)