| Message ID | 20201014101402.18271-21-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: usb: Add generic USB HCD, xHCI, DWC USB3 DT schema | expand |
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 12:23, Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > --- > > Please, test the patch out to make sure it doesn't brake the dependent DTS > files. I did only a manual grepping of the possible nodes dependencies. 1. It is you who should compare the decompiled DTS, not us. For example: $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 scripts/dtc/dtx_diff ${i} dts-new/${i#dts-old/} ; done $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 fdtdump ${i} > ${i}.fdt ; crosc64 fdtdump dts-new/${i#dts-old/} > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; diff -ubB ${i}.fdt dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; done 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it should not go to stable. Best regards, Krzysztof > arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi | 6 +++--- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 2 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 4 ++-- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi | 2 +- > 25 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) >
Hi Serge, Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. interesting, compatibility with what? Some debugfs files, perhaps? :-) In any case, I don't have any problems with this, so I'll let other folks comment.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > Hi Serge, > > Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, which then registers the HCD device so the corresponding DT node is supposed to be compatible with the next bindings: usb/usb-hcd.yaml, usb/usb-xhci.yaml and usb/snps,dwc3,yaml. I've created the later one so to validate the denoted compatibility. > > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > interesting, compatibility with what? Some debugfs files, perhaps? :-) Don't really know.) In my experience the worst type of such compatibility is connected with some bootloader magic, which may add/remove/modify properties to nodes with pre-defined names. -Sergey > > In any case, I don't have any problems with this, so I'll let other > folks comment. > > -- > balbi
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 12:23, Serge Semin > <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > > > --- > > > > Please, test the patch out to make sure it doesn't brake the dependent DTS > > files. I did only a manual grepping of the possible nodes dependencies. > > 1. It is you who should compare the decompiled DTS, not us. For example: > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > scripts/dtc/dtx_diff ${i} dts-new/${i#dts-old/} ; done > > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > fdtdump ${i} > ${i}.fdt ; crosc64 fdtdump dts-new/${i#dts-old/} > > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; diff -ubB ${i}.fdt > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; done So basically you suggest first to compile the old and new dts files, then to de-compile them, then diff old and new fdt's, and visually compare the results. Personally it isn't that much better than what I did, since each old and new dtbs will for sure differ due to the node names change suggested in this patch. So it will lead to the visual debugging too, which isn't that effective. But your approach is still more demonstrative to make sure that I didn't loose any nodes redefinition, since in the occasion the old and new de-compiled nodes will differ not only by the node names but with an additional old named node. So to speak thanks for suggesting it. I'll try it to validate the proposed changes. Two questions: 1) Any advise of a good inliner/command to compile all dtbs at once? Of course I can get all the updated dtsi'es, then find out all the dts'es which include them, then directly use dtc to compile the found dts'es... On the other hand I can just compile all dts'es, then compare old and new ones. The diff of the non-modified dtb'es will be just empty... 2) What crosc64 is? > > 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not > "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. Why? The changes are simple and can be formatted as a single patch. I've seen tons of patches submitted like that, accepted and then merged. What you suggest is just much more work, which I don't see quite required. > > 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here > because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC > node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. > Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it > should not go to stable. Actually it is a fix, because the USB DT nodes should have been named with "usb" prefix in the first place. Legacy DWC USB3 bindings didn't define the nodes naming, but implied to be "usb"-prefixed by the USB HCD schema. The Qualcomm DWC3 schema should have defined the sub-nodes as "dwc3@"-prefixed, which was wrong in the first place. Regarding automatic-pickup-stable-bot if it exists I don't think it scans all the emails, but most likely the stable@vger.kernel.org list only or the emails having the "Fixes:" tag. If I am wrong please give me a link to the bot sources or refer to a doc where I can read about the way it works, to take it into account in future commits. Just to note I submitted patches which did some fixes, had the word "fix" in the subject but weren't selected to be backported to the stable kernel. Anyway I don't really care that much about the subject text using the word "fix" or some else. So if you suggest some better alternative, I'd be glad to consider it. -Sergey > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi | 6 +++--- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 2 +- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi | 2 +- > > 25 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) > >
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 9:37 AM Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > Hi Serge, > > > > Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > > > > DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > > Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, > which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the > controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, > which then registers the HCD device so the corresponding DT node is supposed > to be compatible with the next bindings: usb/usb-hcd.yaml, usb/usb-xhci.yaml > and usb/snps,dwc3,yaml. I've created the later one so to validate the denoted > compatibility. > > > > > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > > > > interesting, compatibility with what? Some debugfs files, perhaps? :-) > > Don't really know.) In my experience the worst type of such compatibility is > connected with some bootloader magic, which may add/remove/modify properties > to nodes with pre-defined names. I seriously doubt anyone is using the APM machines with DT (even ACPI is somewhat doubtful). I say change them. Or remove the dts files and see what happens. Either way it can always be reverted. Rob
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 19:16, Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 12:23, Serge Semin > > <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Please, test the patch out to make sure it doesn't brake the dependent DTS > > > files. I did only a manual grepping of the possible nodes dependencies. > > > > > 1. It is you who should compare the decompiled DTS, not us. For example: > > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > > scripts/dtc/dtx_diff ${i} dts-new/${i#dts-old/} ; done > > > > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > > fdtdump ${i} > ${i}.fdt ; crosc64 fdtdump dts-new/${i#dts-old/} > > > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; diff -ubB ${i}.fdt > > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; done > > So basically you suggest first to compile the old and new dts files, then to > de-compile them, then diff old and new fdt's, and visually compare the results. > Personally it isn't that much better than what I did, since each old and new > dtbs will for sure differ due to the node names change suggested in this patch. > So it will lead to the visual debugging too, which isn't that effective. But > your approach is still more demonstrative to make sure that I didn't loose any > nodes redefinition, since in the occasion the old and new de-compiled nodes will > differ not only by the node names but with an additional old named node. My suggestion is to compare the entire, effective DTS after all inclusions. Maybe you did it already, I don't know. The point is that when you change node names in DTSI but you miss one in DTS, you end up with two nodes. This is much easier to spot with dtxdiff or with fdtdump (which behaves better for node moves). Indeed it is still a visual comparison - if you have any ideas how to automate it (e.g. ignore phandle changes), please share. It would solve my testings as well. But asking others to test because you do not want to check it is not the best way to handle such changes. > > So to speak thanks for suggesting it. I'll try it to validate the proposed > changes. > > Two questions: > 1) Any advise of a good inliner/command to compile all dtbs at once? Of course I > can get all the updated dtsi'es, then find out all the dts'es which include > them, then directly use dtc to compile the found dts'es... On the other hand I > can just compile all dts'es, then compare old and new ones. The diff of the > non-modified dtb'es will be just empty... make dtbs touch your dts or git stash pop make dtbs compare diff for all unchanged will be simply empty, so easy to spot > 2) What crosc64 is? Ah, just an alias for cross compiling + ccache + kbuild out. I just copied you my helpers, so you need to tweak them. > > > > > 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not > > "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. > > Why? The changes are simple and can be formatted as a single patch. I've seen > tons of patches submitted like that, accepted and then merged. What you suggest > is just much more work, which I don't see quite required. DTS changes go separate between arm64 and arm. There is nothing unusual here - all changes are submitted like this. Second topic is to split by subarchitectures which is necessary if you want it to be picked up by maintainers. It also makes it easier to review. Sure, without split ber subarchitectures this could be picked up by SoC folks but you did not even CC them. So if you do not want to split it per subarchitectures for maintainers and you do not CC SoC, then how do you believe this should be picked up? Out of the regular patch submission way? That's not how the changes are handled. > > > > > 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here > > because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC > > node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. > > Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it > > should not go to stable. > > Actually it is a fix, because the USB DT nodes should have been named with "usb" > prefix in the first place. Legacy DWC USB3 bindings didn't define the nodes > naming, but implied to be "usb"-prefixed by the USB HCD schema. The Qualcomm > DWC3 schema should have defined the sub-nodes as "dwc3@"-prefixed, which was > wrong in the first place. Not following the naming convention of DT spec which was loosely enforced is not an error which should be "fixed". Simply wrong title. This is an alignment with dtschema or correcting naming convention. Not fixing errors. > > Regarding automatic-pickup-stable-bot if it exists I don't think it scans all the > emails, but most likely the stable@vger.kernel.org list only or the emails > having the "Fixes:" tag. If I am wrong please give me a link to the bot sources > or refer to a doc where I can read about the way it works, to take it into > account in future commits. Just to note I submitted patches which did some fixes, > had the word "fix" in the subject but weren't selected to be backported to the > stable kernel. You mixed up bots. The regular stable bot picks commits with cc-stable or with "Fixes". The auto-pickup bot picks all commits (not emails... why would it look at emails?) looking like a fix. Wording could be one of the hints used in the heuristic. Anyway, this is not a fix, regardless of autosel, so the wording is not correct. Just Google for AUTOSEL. You can then ask Sasha for sources... > Anyway I don't really care that much about the subject text using the word "fix" > or some else. So if you suggest some better alternative, I'd be glad to consider > it. I already did. One example is: alignment with dtschema. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 01:35:16PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 9:37 AM Serge Semin > <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > > > Hi Serge, > > > > > > Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > > > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > > > > > > > DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > > > > Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, > > which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the > > controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, > > which then registers the HCD device so the corresponding DT node is supposed > > to be compatible with the next bindings: usb/usb-hcd.yaml, usb/usb-xhci.yaml > > and usb/snps,dwc3,yaml. I've created the later one so to validate the denoted > > compatibility. > > > > > > > > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > > > > > > > interesting, compatibility with what? Some debugfs files, perhaps? :-) > > > > Don't really know.) In my experience the worst type of such compatibility is > > connected with some bootloader magic, which may add/remove/modify properties > > to nodes with pre-defined names. > > I seriously doubt anyone is using the APM machines with DT (even ACPI > is somewhat doubtful). I say change them. Or remove the dts files and > see what happens. Either way it can always be reverted. Ok. I'll change them in v3. -Sergey > > Rob
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 10:04:32PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 19:16, Serge Semin > <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 12:33:25PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 12:23, Serge Semin > > > <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > > > > > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > > > > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > > > > nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot > > > > of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have > > > > name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause > > > > the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be > > > > compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. > > > > > > > > Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of > > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the > > > > in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as > > > > "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Please, test the patch out to make sure it doesn't brake the dependent DTS > > > > files. I did only a manual grepping of the possible nodes dependencies. > > > > > > > > 1. It is you who should compare the decompiled DTS, not us. For example: > > > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > > > scripts/dtc/dtx_diff ${i} dts-new/${i#dts-old/} ; done > > > > > > $ for i in dts-old/*/*dtb dts-old/*/*/*dtb; do echo $i; crosc64 > > > fdtdump ${i} > ${i}.fdt ; crosc64 fdtdump dts-new/${i#dts-old/} > > > > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; diff -ubB ${i}.fdt > > > dts-new/${i#dts-old/}.fdt ; done > > > > So basically you suggest first to compile the old and new dts files, then to > > de-compile them, then diff old and new fdt's, and visually compare the results. > > Personally it isn't that much better than what I did, since each old and new > > dtbs will for sure differ due to the node names change suggested in this patch. > > So it will lead to the visual debugging too, which isn't that effective. But > > your approach is still more demonstrative to make sure that I didn't loose any > > nodes redefinition, since in the occasion the old and new de-compiled nodes will > > differ not only by the node names but with an additional old named node. > > My suggestion is to compare the entire, effective DTS after all > inclusions. Maybe you did it already, I don't know. Only by grepping the dts'es, which include the dtsi'es modified in this patch. So your suggestion of compiling and de-compiling has been indeed relevant. > The point is that > when you change node names in DTSI but you miss one in DTS, you end up > with two nodes. Yep, that's exactly what I meant when I said that your approach was more demonstrative, etc. > This is much easier to spot with dtxdiff or with > fdtdump (which behaves better for node moves). > > Indeed it is still a visual comparison - if you have any ideas how to > automate it (e.g. ignore phandle changes), please share. It would > solve my testings as well. Alas I don't. That's why to save my time of coming up with an automated solution I did a very thorough modification making sure that each affected node isn't updated in the corresponding dts'es and asked to test the patches out. Anyway the approach suggested by you will indeed give us a better understanding of my patches correctness. So I'll use it before sending v3. Thanks. > But asking others to test because you do > not want to check it is not the best way to handle such changes. > > > > > So to speak thanks for suggesting it. I'll try it to validate the proposed > > changes. > > > > Two questions: > > 1) Any advise of a good inliner/command to compile all dtbs at once? Of course I > > can get all the updated dtsi'es, then find out all the dts'es which include > > them, then directly use dtc to compile the found dts'es... On the other hand I > > can just compile all dts'es, then compare old and new ones. The diff of the > > non-modified dtb'es will be just empty... > > make dtbs It's not that easy.) "make dtbs" will build dtbs only for enabled boards, which first need to be enabled in the kernel config. So I'll need to have a config with all the affected dts. The later is the same as if I just found all the affected dts and built them one-by-one by directly calling dtc. > touch your dts or git stash pop > make dtbs > compare > diff for all unchanged will be simply empty, so easy to spot > > > 2) What crosc64 is? > > Ah, just an alias for cross compiling + ccache + kbuild out. I just > copied you my helpers, so you need to tweak them. > > > > > > > > > 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not > > > "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. > > > > Why? The changes are simple and can be formatted as a single patch. I've seen > > tons of patches submitted like that, accepted and then merged. What you suggest > > is just much more work, which I don't see quite required. > > DTS changes go separate between arm64 and arm. There is nothing > unusual here - all changes are submitted like this. > Second topic is to split by subarchitectures which is necessary if you > want it to be picked up by maintainers. It also makes it easier to > review. The current patches are easy enough for review. The last three patches of the series is a collection of the one-type changes concerning the same type of nodes. So reviewing them won't cause any difficulty. But I assume that's not the main point in this discussion. > Sure, without split ber subarchitectures this could be picked > up by SoC folks but you did not even CC them. So if you do not want to > split it per subarchitectures for maintainers and you do not CC SoC, > then how do you believe this should be picked up? Out of the regular > patch submission way? That's not how the changes are handled. AFAIU there are another ways of merging comprehensive patches. If they get to collect all the Acked-by tags, they could be merged in, for instance, through Greg' or Rob' (for dts) repos, if of course they get to agree with doing that. Am I wrong? My hope was to ask Rob or Greg to get the patches merged in when they get to collect all the ackes, since I thought it was an option in such cases. So if they refuse to do so I'll have no choice but to split the series up into a smaller patches as you say. > > > > > > > > > 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here > > > because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC > > > node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. > > > Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it > > > should not go to stable. > > > > Actually it is a fix, because the USB DT nodes should have been named with "usb" > > prefix in the first place. Legacy DWC USB3 bindings didn't define the nodes > > naming, but implied to be "usb"-prefixed by the USB HCD schema. The Qualcomm > > DWC3 schema should have defined the sub-nodes as "dwc3@"-prefixed, which was > > wrong in the first place. > > Not following the naming convention of DT spec which was loosely > enforced is not an error which should be "fixed". Simply wrong title. > This is an alignment with dtschema or correcting naming convention. > Not fixing errors.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 02:51:05AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > > > So to speak thanks for suggesting it. I'll try it to validate the proposed > > > changes. > > > > > > Two questions: > > > 1) Any advise of a good inliner/command to compile all dtbs at once? Of course I > > > can get all the updated dtsi'es, then find out all the dts'es which include > > > them, then directly use dtc to compile the found dts'es... On the other hand I > > > can just compile all dts'es, then compare old and new ones. The diff of the > > > non-modified dtb'es will be just empty... > > > > > make dtbs > > It's not that easy.) "make dtbs" will build dtbs only for enabled boards, which > first need to be enabled in the kernel config. So I'll need to have a config > with all the affected dts. The later is the same as if I just found all the > affected dts and built them one-by-one by directly calling dtc. True. Sometimes allyesconfig for given arch might be helpful but not always (e.g. for ARM it does not select all of ARMv4 and ARMv5 boards). Most likely your approach is actually faster/more reliable. > > > touch your dts or git stash pop > > make dtbs > > compare > > diff for all unchanged will be simply empty, so easy to spot > > > > > 2) What crosc64 is? > > > > Ah, just an alias for cross compiling + ccache + kbuild out. I just > > copied you my helpers, so you need to tweak them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not > > > > "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. > > > > > > Why? The changes are simple and can be formatted as a single patch. I've seen > > > tons of patches submitted like that, accepted and then merged. What you suggest > > > is just much more work, which I don't see quite required. > > > > > DTS changes go separate between arm64 and arm. There is nothing > > unusual here - all changes are submitted like this. > > Second topic is to split by subarchitectures which is necessary if you > > want it to be picked up by maintainers. It also makes it easier to > > review. > > The current patches are easy enough for review. The last three patches of the > series is a collection of the one-type changes concerning the same type of > nodes. So reviewing them won't cause any difficulty. But I assume that's not > the main point in this discussion. > > > Sure, without split ber subarchitectures this could be picked > > up by SoC folks but you did not even CC them. So if you do not want to > > split it per subarchitectures for maintainers and you do not CC SoC, > > then how do you believe this should be picked up? Out of the regular > > patch submission way? That's not how the changes are handled. > > AFAIU there are another ways of merging comprehensive patches. If they get to collect > all the Acked-by tags, they could be merged in, for instance, through Greg' or Rob' > (for dts) repos, if of course they get to agree with doing that. Am I wrong? > > My hope was to ask Rob or Greg to get the patches merged in when they get > to collect all the ackes, since I thought it was an option in such cases. So if > they refuse to do so I'll have no choice but to split the series up into a > smaller patches as you say. This is neither Rob's nor Greg's patch to pick up, but ARM SoC (which was not CCed here). And most likely they won't pick it up because judging by contents it is obvious it should go via ARM SoC. Sure, if there are dependencies between some patches they can go with acks through unrelated trees, but this not the usual way. This is an exception in the process to solve particular dependency problem. It has drawbacks - increases the chances of annoying conflicts. The case here does not fall into this criteria - there is no dependency of this patch on the others Therefore there is no reason to use the unusual/exceptional way of handling patches. There is no reason why this shouldn't go via either specific ARM subarchitecture maintainers or via ARM SoC. > > > > 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here > > > > because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC > > > > node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. > > > > Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it > > > > should not go to stable. > > > > > > Actually it is a fix, because the USB DT nodes should have been named with "usb" > > > prefix in the first place. Legacy DWC USB3 bindings didn't define the nodes > > > naming, but implied to be "usb"-prefixed by the USB HCD schema. The Qualcomm > > > DWC3 schema should have defined the sub-nodes as "dwc3@"-prefixed, which was > > > wrong in the first place. > > > > > Not following the naming convention of DT spec which was loosely > > enforced is not an error which should be "fixed". Simply wrong title. > > This is an alignment with dtschema or correcting naming convention. > > Not fixing errors. > > From your perspective it wasn't an error, from mine and most likely Rob' it > was.) Anyway as I said I don't care that much about preserving the subject > wording, so what about the next one: > <arch>: <subarch>: Harmonize DWC USB3 nodes name with DT schema > ? Looks good. Best regards, Krzysztof
Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> >> Hi Serge, >> >> Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: >> > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is >> > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB >> > >> DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > > Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, > which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the > controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, in Dual-role or host-only builds, that's correct. We can also have peripheral-only builds (both SW or HW versions) which means xhci isn't even in the picture.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 01:15:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >> > >> Hi Serge, > >> > >> Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > >> > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > >> > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > >> > > > >> DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > > > > Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, > > which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the > > controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, > > in Dual-role or host-only builds, that's correct. We can also have > peripheral-only builds (both SW or HW versions) which means xhci isn't > even in the picture. Hm, good point. In that case perhaps we'll need to apply the xHCI DT schema conditionally. Like this: - allOf: - - $ref: usb-xhci.yaml# + allOf: + - if: + properties: + dr_mode: + const: peripheral + then: + $ref: usb-hcd.yaml# + else: + $ref: usb-xhci.yaml# Note, we need to have the peripheral device being compatible with the usb-hcd.yaml schema to support the maximum-speed, dr_mode properties and to comply with the USB node naming constraint. -Sergey > > -- > balbi
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 01:15:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > > > On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 05:09:37PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >> > >> Hi Serge, > >> > >> Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> writes: > >> > In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is > >> > suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB > >> > > > >> DWC3 is not a simple HDC, though. > > > > Yeah, strictly speaking it is equipped with a lot of vendor-specific stuff, > > which are tuned by the DWC USB3 driver in the kernel. But after that the > > controller is registered as xhci-hcd device so it's serviced by the xHCI driver, > > in Dual-role or host-only builds, that's correct. We can also have > peripheral-only builds (both SW or HW versions) which means xhci isn't > even in the picture. It doesn't really matter though, or at least it does for what the new name might be, but the old one currently used is still pretty bad. The DT spec says that the node name is the class of the device. "usb" as the HCD binding mandates is one, but the current nodes currently have completely different names from one DT to another - which is already an issue - and most of them have dwc3 or some variant of it, which doesn't really qualify for a class name. Maxime
On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 08:14:39AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 02:51:05AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > > > > > > > So to speak thanks for suggesting it. I'll try it to validate the proposed > > > > changes. > > > > > > > > Two questions: > > > > 1) Any advise of a good inliner/command to compile all dtbs at once? Of course I > > > > can get all the updated dtsi'es, then find out all the dts'es which include > > > > them, then directly use dtc to compile the found dts'es... On the other hand I > > > > can just compile all dts'es, then compare old and new ones. The diff of the > > > > non-modified dtb'es will be just empty... > > > > > > > > make dtbs > > > > It's not that easy.) "make dtbs" will build dtbs only for enabled boards, which > > first need to be enabled in the kernel config. So I'll need to have a config > > with all the affected dts. The later is the same as if I just found all the > > affected dts and built them one-by-one by directly calling dtc. > > True. Sometimes allyesconfig for given arch might be helpful but not > always (e.g. for ARM it does not select all of ARMv4 and ARMv5 boards). > Most likely your approach is actually faster/more reliable. > > > > > > touch your dts or git stash pop > > > make dtbs > > > compare > > > diff for all unchanged will be simply empty, so easy to spot > > > > > > > 2) What crosc64 is? > > > > > > Ah, just an alias for cross compiling + ccache + kbuild out. I just > > > copied you my helpers, so you need to tweak them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Split it per arm architectures (and proper subject prefix - not > > > > > "arch") and subarchitectures so maintainers can pick it up. > > > > > > > > Why? The changes are simple and can be formatted as a single patch. I've seen > > > > tons of patches submitted like that, accepted and then merged. What you suggest > > > > is just much more work, which I don't see quite required. > > > > > > > > DTS changes go separate between arm64 and arm. There is nothing > > > unusual here - all changes are submitted like this. > > > Second topic is to split by subarchitectures which is necessary if you > > > want it to be picked up by maintainers. It also makes it easier to > > > review. > > > > The current patches are easy enough for review. The last three patches of the > > series is a collection of the one-type changes concerning the same type of > > nodes. So reviewing them won't cause any difficulty. But I assume that's not > > the main point in this discussion. > > > > > Sure, without split ber subarchitectures this could be picked > > > up by SoC folks but you did not even CC them. So if you do not want to > > > split it per subarchitectures for maintainers and you do not CC SoC, > > > then how do you believe this should be picked up? Out of the regular > > > patch submission way? That's not how the changes are handled. > > > > AFAIU there are another ways of merging comprehensive patches. If they get to collect > > all the Acked-by tags, they could be merged in, for instance, through Greg' or Rob' > > (for dts) repos, if of course they get to agree with doing that. Am I wrong? > > > > My hope was to ask Rob or Greg to get the patches merged in when they get > > to collect all the ackes, since I thought it was an option in such cases. So if > > they refuse to do so I'll have no choice but to split the series up into a > > smaller patches as you say. > > This is neither Rob's nor Greg's patch to pick up, but ARM SoC (which was > not CCed here). And most likely they won't pick it up because judging by > contents it is obvious it should go via ARM SoC. > > Sure, if there are dependencies between some patches they can go with > acks through unrelated trees, but this not the usual way. This is an > exception in the process to solve particular dependency problem. It has > drawbacks - increases the chances of annoying conflicts. > > The case here does not fall into this criteria - there is no dependency > of this patch on the others Therefore there is no reason to use the > unusual/exceptional way of handling patches. There is no reason why > this shouldn't go via either specific ARM subarchitecture maintainers or > via ARM SoC. Ok. I see your point. To sum it up I've studied the git log arch/ commit messages and it turns out even Rob has to split the cleanup changes like this ones. So thanks for your patience with stating your point. I'll split the last three patches up to be merged in via the corresponding archs/subarch'es repos. -Sergey > > > > > > 3. The subject title could be more accurate - there is no fix here > > > > > because there was no errors in the first place. Requirement of DWC > > > > > node names comes recently, so it is more alignment with dtschema. > > > > > Otherwise automatic-pickup-stable-bot might want to pick up... and it > > > > > should not go to stable. > > > > > > > > Actually it is a fix, because the USB DT nodes should have been named with "usb" > > > > prefix in the first place. Legacy DWC USB3 bindings didn't define the nodes > > > > naming, but implied to be "usb"-prefixed by the USB HCD schema. The Qualcomm > > > > DWC3 schema should have defined the sub-nodes as "dwc3@"-prefixed, which was > > > > wrong in the first place. > > > > > > > > Not following the naming convention of DT spec which was loosely > > > enforced is not an error which should be "fixed". Simply wrong title. > > > This is an alignment with dtschema or correcting naming convention. > > > Not fixing errors. > > > > From your perspective it wasn't an error, from mine and most likely Rob' it > > was.) Anyway as I said I don't care that much about preserving the subject > > wording, so what about the next one: > > <arch>: <subarch>: Harmonize DWC USB3 nodes name with DT schema > > ? > > Looks good. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi index 9805e507c695..7f2f24a29e6c 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi @@ -426,7 +426,7 @@ usb1: usb@54000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb2: usb3@58000 { + usb2: usb@58000 { compatible = "marvell,armada-375-xhci"; reg = <0x58000 0x20000>,<0x5b880 0x80>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 16 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi index e3dbe4166836..ebcf8b40ea81 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi @@ -629,7 +629,7 @@ usb_dwc3 { #size-cells = <1>; ranges; - usbdrd_dwc3: dwc3@12000000 { + usbdrd_dwc3: usb@12000000 { compatible = "synopsys,dwc3"; reg = <0x12000000 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 72 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi index 8aa5117e58ce..339243d19a80 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ usbdrd3_0: usb3-0 { #size-cells = <1>; ranges; - usbdrd_dwc3_0: dwc3@12000000 { + usbdrd_dwc3_0: usb@12000000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x12000000 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 72 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ usbdrd3_1: usb3-1 { #size-cells = <1>; ranges; - usbdrd_dwc3_1: dwc3@12400000 { + usbdrd_dwc3_1: usb@12400000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x12400000 0x10000>; phys = <&usbdrd_phy1 0>, <&usbdrd_phy1 1>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi index 2d94faf31fab..d625ad10cfad 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ &soc0 { usb: usb@2680000 { interrupts = <GIC_SPI 152 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; - dwc3@2690000 { + usb@2690000 { interrupts = <GIC_SPI 152 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; }; }; @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ keystone_usb1: usb@25000000 { dma-ranges; status = "disabled"; - usb1: dwc3@25010000 { + usb1: usb@25010000 { compatible = "synopsys,dwc3"; reg = <0x25010000 0x70000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 414 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi index c298675a29a5..6f9748349f09 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ keystone_usb0: usb@2680000 { dma-ranges; status = "disabled"; - usb0: dwc3@2690000 { + usb0: usb@2690000 { compatible = "synopsys,dwc3"; reg = <0x2690000 0x70000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 393 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi index 827373ef1a54..5c4104d301f1 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi @@ -874,7 +874,7 @@ usb2: usb@8600000 { phy_type = "ulpi"; }; - usb3: usb3@3100000 { + usb3: usb@3100000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3100000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 93 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi index f3d3a16b7c64..887b3359dd5a 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi @@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ usb3: omap_dwc3@0 { #size-cells = <1>; utmi-mode = <2>; ranges = <0 0 0x20000>; - dwc3: dwc3@10000 { + dwc3: usb@10000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x10000 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 92 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi index 23a1746f3baa..2352f76b5a69 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi @@ -681,7 +681,7 @@ st_dwc3: dwc3@8f94000 { status = "disabled"; - dwc3: dwc3@9900000 { + dwc3: usb@9900000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x09900000 0x100000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 155 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi index 9ce78a7b117d..7d1bbff25294 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi @@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ ohci0: usb@5101400 { status = "disabled"; }; - dwc3: dwc3@5200000 { + dwc3: usb@5200000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x05200000 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 26 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi index 74ac4ac75865..3320e596cb3f 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi @@ -1651,7 +1651,7 @@ usbdrd30: usbdrd { ranges; status = "disabled"; - usbdrd_dwc3: dwc3@15400000 { + usbdrd_dwc3: usb@15400000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; clocks = <&cmu_fsys CLK_SCLK_USBDRD30>, <&cmu_fsys CLK_ACLK_USBDRD30>, @@ -1704,7 +1704,7 @@ usbhost30: usbhost { ranges; status = "disabled"; - usbhost_dwc3: dwc3@15a00000 { + usbhost_dwc3: usb@15a00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; clocks = <&cmu_fsys CLK_SCLK_USBHOST30>, <&cmu_fsys CLK_ACLK_USBHOST30>, diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi index b9ed6a33e290..48cd3a04fd07 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi @@ -654,7 +654,7 @@ usbdrd3 { #size-cells = <1>; ranges; - dwc3@15400000 { + usb@15400000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x15400000 0x10000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 223 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi index ff19ec415b60..06dac6be67e9 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ edma0: edma@2c00000 { <&clockgen 4 3>; }; - usb0: usb3@2f00000 { + usb0: usb@2f00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x2f00000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 60 0x4>; @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ sata: sata@3200000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb1: usb2@8600000 { + usb1: usb@8600000 { compatible = "fsl-usb2-dr-v2.5", "fsl-usb2-dr"; reg = <0x0 0x8600000 0x0 0x1000>; interrupts = <0 139 0x4>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi index 5c2e370f6316..1f45fa32e57b 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi @@ -750,7 +750,7 @@ edma0: edma@2c00000 { <&clockgen 4 0>; }; - usb0: usb3@2f00000 { + usb0: usb@2f00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x2f00000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 60 0x4>; @@ -761,7 +761,7 @@ usb0: usb3@2f00000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb1: usb3@3000000 { + usb1: usb@3000000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3000000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 61 0x4>; @@ -772,7 +772,7 @@ usb1: usb3@3000000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb2: usb3@3100000 { + usb2: usb@3100000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3100000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 63 0x4>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi index 169f4742ae3b..96723b53a4e9 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi @@ -402,7 +402,7 @@ esdhc: esdhc@2140000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb0: usb3@3100000 { + usb0: usb@3100000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3100000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 80 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ usb0: usb3@3100000 { status = "disabled"; }; - usb1: usb3@3110000 { + usb1: usb@3110000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3110000 0x0 0x10000>; interrupts = <0 81 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi index 41102dacc2e1..d356ec2beee3 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi @@ -737,7 +737,7 @@ sata1: sata@3210000 { dma-coherent; }; - usb0: usb3@3100000 { + usb0: usb@3100000 { status = "disabled"; compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3100000 0x0 0x10000>; @@ -748,7 +748,7 @@ usb0: usb3@3100000 { snps,incr-burst-type-adjustment = <1>, <4>, <8>, <16>; }; - usb1: usb3@3110000 { + usb1: usb@3110000 { status = "disabled"; compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0x3110000 0x0 0x10000>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi index d25aac5e0bf8..aea3800029b5 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi @@ -1166,7 +1166,7 @@ usb_phy: usb-phy { }; }; - dwc3: dwc3@ff100000 { + dwc3: usb@ff100000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0 0xff100000 0x0 0x100000>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi index defcbd15edf9..34e97da98270 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi @@ -1064,7 +1064,7 @@ &usb2 { status = "okay"; extcon = <&usb2_id>; - dwc3@7600000 { + usb@7600000 { extcon = <&usb2_id>; dr_mode = "otg"; maximum-speed = "high-speed"; @@ -1075,7 +1075,7 @@ &usb3 { status = "okay"; extcon = <&usb3_id>; - dwc3@6a00000 { + usb@6a00000 { extcon = <&usb3_id>; dr_mode = "otg"; }; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi index 96a5ec89b5f0..1129062a4ca1 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi @@ -427,7 +427,7 @@ usb_0: usb@8af8800 { resets = <&gcc GCC_USB0_BCR>; status = "disabled"; - dwc_0: dwc3@8a00000 { + dwc_0: usb@8a00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x8a00000 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 140 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -468,7 +468,7 @@ usb_1: usb@8cf8800 { resets = <&gcc GCC_USB1_BCR>; status = "disabled"; - dwc_1: dwc3@8c00000 { + dwc_1: usb@8c00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x8c00000 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 99 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi index 9951286db775..66b6d2f0a093 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi @@ -1767,7 +1767,7 @@ usb3: usb@6af8800 { power-domains = <&gcc USB30_GDSC>; status = "disabled"; - dwc3@6a00000 { + usb@6a00000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x06a00000 0xcc00>; interrupts = <0 131 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -1978,7 +1978,7 @@ usb2: usb@76f8800 { power-domains = <&gcc USB30_GDSC>; status = "disabled"; - dwc3@7600000 { + usb@7600000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x07600000 0xcc00>; interrupts = <0 138 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi index c45870600909..7cc7897e7b83 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi @@ -1678,7 +1678,7 @@ usb3: usb@a8f8800 { resets = <&gcc GCC_USB_30_BCR>; - usb3_dwc3: dwc3@a800000 { + usb3_dwc3: usb@a800000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x0a800000 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 131 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi index 6422cf9d5855..88d7b7a53743 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ &usb2_phy_sec { &usb3 { status = "okay"; - dwc3@7580000 { + usb@7580000 { dr_mode = "host"; }; }; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi index b654b802e95c..f6ef17553064 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi @@ -544,7 +544,7 @@ usb3: usb@7678800 { assigned-clock-rates = <19200000>, <200000000>; status = "disabled"; - dwc3@7580000 { + usb@7580000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x07580000 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 26 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -573,7 +573,7 @@ usb2: usb@79b8800 { assigned-clock-rates = <19200000>, <133333333>; status = "disabled"; - dwc3@78c0000 { + usb@78c0000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0x078c0000 0xcc00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 44 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi index d46b3833e52f..bbc9a2b5c570 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi @@ -2673,7 +2673,7 @@ usb_1: usb@a6f8800 { <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC &config_noc SLAVE_USB3>; interconnect-names = "usb-ddr", "apps-usb"; - usb_1_dwc3: dwc3@a600000 { + usb_1_dwc3: usb@a600000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0 0x0a600000 0 0xe000>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 133 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi index 2884577dcb77..ca20e4e91f61 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi @@ -3573,7 +3573,7 @@ usb_1: usb@a6f8800 { <&gladiator_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC &config_noc SLAVE_USB3_0>; interconnect-names = "usb-ddr", "apps-usb"; - usb_1_dwc3: dwc3@a600000 { + usb_1_dwc3: usb@a600000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0 0x0a600000 0 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 133 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; @@ -3621,7 +3621,7 @@ usb_2: usb@a8f8800 { <&gladiator_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC &config_noc SLAVE_USB3_1>; interconnect-names = "usb-ddr", "apps-usb"; - usb_2_dwc3: dwc3@a800000 { + usb_2_dwc3: usb@a800000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0 0x0a800000 0 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 138 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi index b86a7ead3006..167d14dda974 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ usb_1: usb@a6f8800 { resets = <&gcc GCC_USB30_PRIM_BCR>; - usb_1_dwc3: dwc3@a600000 { + usb_1_dwc3: usb@a600000 { compatible = "snps,dwc3"; reg = <0 0x0a600000 0 0xcd00>; interrupts = <GIC_SPI 133 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
In accordance with the DWC USB3 bindings the corresponding node name is suppose to comply with Generic USB HCD DT schema, which requires the USB nodes to have the name acceptable by the regexp: "^usb(@.*)?" . But a lot of the DWC USB3-compatible nodes defined in the ARM/ARM64 DTS files have name as "^dwc3@.*" or "^usb[1-3]@.*" or even "^dwusb@.*", which will cause the dtbs_check procedure failure. Let's fix the nodes naming to be compatible with the DWC USB3 DT schema to make dtbs_check happy. Note we don't change the DWC USB3-compatible nodes names of arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/{apm-storm.dtsi,apm-shadowcat.dtsi} since the in-source comment says that the nodes name need to be preserved as "^dwusb@.*" for some backward compatibility. Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru> --- Please, test the patch out to make sure it doesn't brake the dependent DTS files. I did only a manual grepping of the possible nodes dependencies. --- arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos54xx.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone-k2e.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm/boot/dts/keystone.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/ls1021a.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-l4.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm/boot/dts/stih407-family.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-h6.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos5433.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynos7.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1012a.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1043a.dtsi | 6 +++--- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1088a.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls208xa.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/hisilicon/hi3660.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq8074.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8996.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/msm8998.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404-evb.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qcs404.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi | 4 ++-- arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8150.dtsi | 2 +- 25 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)