[PATCH 1/6] ARM: dts: sam9x60: Add OHCI and EHCI DT nodes

[Marek Vasut]

On 1/4/23 08:30, Eugen.Hristev at microchip.com wrote:
> On 1/3/23 01:12, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 12/23/22 13:33, Sergiu Moga wrote:
>>> Add the OHCI and EHCI DT nodes for the sam9x60 boards.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sergiu Moga <sergiu.moga at microchip.com>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/arm/dts/at91-sam9x60_curiosity.dts | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    arch/arm/dts/sam9x60.dtsi               | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>
>> Board and SoC DT changes should be in separate patches.
>>
>>>    arch/arm/dts/sam9x60ek.dts              | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    3 files changed, 60 insertions(+)
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/sam9x60.dtsi b/arch/arm/dts/sam9x60.dtsi
>>> index 17224ef771..e36a540f78 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/sam9x60.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/sam9x60.dtsi
>>> @@ -69,6 +69,24 @@
>>>                #size-cells = <1>;
>>>                ranges;
>>>
>>> +             usb1: ohci at 600000 {
>>
>> This should be usb@ instead of ohci@ , if you run "make dtbs_check" on
>> this DT in Linux (please do), you would likely get a warning , see Linux
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb.yaml .
> 
> 
> If in Linux we have ohci@ , then we need to have the same in U-boot.

You should update the Linux DT to usb@ too to avoid dtbs_check warnings.

> We can accept the change to usb@ , if there is a pending patch in Linux.

I can make the same argument about Linux, since DTs are OS agnostic. My 
comment is OS agnostic too and does not apply specifically to U-Boot or 
Linux, it applies to DT.

> U-boot is not the place to review the devicetree.

I strongly disagree with this statement.

What does it matter where the review feedback came from ?
What does matter is that you can improve the DT based on that feedback, 
if the feedback is valid.

> The devicetree must be in sync with Linux.

I agree with this statement.

Please update the Linux DT too.