| Message ID | 1649964337-114337-2-git-send-email-zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add OTG support for Ingenic SoCs. | expand |
Hi Zhou, Le ven., avril 15 2022 at 03:25:35 +0800, 周琰杰 (Zhou Yanjie) <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com> a écrit : > Add the dwc2 bindings for the JZ4775 SoC, the JZ4780 SoC, the X1000 > SoC, the X1600 SoC, the X1700 SoC, the X1830 SoC, and the X2000 SoC > from Ingenic. > > Signed-off-by: 周琰杰 (Zhou Yanjie) <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com> > Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> > --- > > Notes: > v1->v2: > Add Rob Herring's Acked-by. > > v2->v3: > No change. > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml | 7 +++++++ > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml > index 4cebce6..c6e8c0b 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml > @@ -17,6 +17,13 @@ properties: > oneOf: > - const: brcm,bcm2835-usb > - const: hisilicon,hi6220-usb > + - const: ingenic,jz4775-otg > + - const: ingenic,jz4780-otg > + - const: ingenic,x1000-otg The driver handles the JZ4775, JZ4780 and X1000 the exact same way. Maybe the latter two should use the JZ4775 string as the fallback? Do you know if the IP cores are any different? > + - const: ingenic,x1600-otg > + - const: ingenic,x1700-otg > + - const: ingenic,x1830-otg Same here (and btw, first time I hear about the X1600 and X1700 ;)) Cheers, -Paul > + - const: ingenic,x2000-otg > - items: > - const: rockchip,rk3066-usb > - const: snps,dwc2 > -- > 2.7.4 >
Hi Paul, On 2022/4/17 上午12:34, Paul Cercueil wrote: > Hi Zhou, > > Le ven., avril 15 2022 at 03:25:35 +0800, 周琰杰 (Zhou Yanjie) > <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com> a écrit : >> Add the dwc2 bindings for the JZ4775 SoC, the JZ4780 SoC, the X1000 >> SoC, the X1600 SoC, the X1700 SoC, the X1830 SoC, and the X2000 SoC >> from Ingenic. >> >> Signed-off-by: 周琰杰 (Zhou Yanjie) <zhouyanjie@wanyeetech.com> >> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> >> --- >> >> Notes: >> v1->v2: >> Add Rob Herring's Acked-by. >> >> v2->v3: >> No change. >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml | 7 +++++++ >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml >> index 4cebce6..c6e8c0b 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml >> @@ -17,6 +17,13 @@ properties: >> oneOf: >> - const: brcm,bcm2835-usb >> - const: hisilicon,hi6220-usb >> + - const: ingenic,jz4775-otg >> + - const: ingenic,jz4780-otg >> + - const: ingenic,x1000-otg > > The driver handles the JZ4775, JZ4780 and X1000 the exact same way. > Maybe the latter two should use the JZ4775 string as the fallback? Do > you know if the IP cores are any different? > From the manual, it seems that JZ4775 and JZ4780 should have the same specifications, but in fact, the behavior of JZ4775 and JZ4780 is different, especially if the JZ4780 does not turn off overcurrent detection, there will be a high probability of affecting the use, while the JZ4775 does not have this problem, so I think they should actually be different. The manual of X1000 shows that it has only 8 endpoints, which is different from JZ4775 and JZ4780. From the experimental results, it seems that the three of them can use the same set of parameters, but in order to avoid hidden dangers that have not been found for the time being, I think it seems necessary to keep three independent compatible strings. >> + - const: ingenic,x1600-otg >> + - const: ingenic,x1700-otg >> + - const: ingenic,x1830-otg > > Same here (and btw, first time I hear about the X1600 and X1700 ;)) The OTG of X1600 and X1700 seem to be the same, I will remove the compatibility string of X1700 in the next version, but the device tree of X1830 in Ingenic SDK is configured with different parameters from X1600/X1700, so I believe the X1830 should be a little different from the X1600/X1700, so although the experimental results show that the three of them seem to be able to use the same parameters, it seems that it is more appropriate to keep the compatibe string of X1830. I also heard about the X1600 and X1700 not long ago. From the existing information, the X1600 should be the only SoC with CAN in the known models of Ingenic. And the X1700 is more like an SoC that focuses on display applications. Thanks and best regards! > > Cheers, > -Paul > >> + - const: ingenic,x2000-otg >> - items: >> - const: rockchip,rk3066-usb >> - const: snps,dwc2 >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> >
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml index 4cebce6..c6e8c0b 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/dwc2.yaml @@ -17,6 +17,13 @@ properties: oneOf: - const: brcm,bcm2835-usb - const: hisilicon,hi6220-usb + - const: ingenic,jz4775-otg + - const: ingenic,jz4780-otg + - const: ingenic,x1000-otg + - const: ingenic,x1600-otg + - const: ingenic,x1700-otg + - const: ingenic,x1830-otg + - const: ingenic,x2000-otg - items: - const: rockchip,rk3066-usb - const: snps,dwc2