U-Boot of-platdata issue

U-Boot Kever Yang 3 participants 7 messages Jan 16, 2017 – Apr 25, 2017

lore

Share & tools

lore

Kever Yang

author

2017-01-16 01:28 UTC #0 lore raw

Hi Simon,

I met two issue when using of-platdata

1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant

  struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                    ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before 
numeric constant
  static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
                                           ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared 
here (not in a function)
   .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
                ^

make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2

The dts node starts like this:

         sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                 u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                 compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",

"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...

2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use? for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using the first one,
while the source code using the last one.

"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
25 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
26 #endif
27 struct mmc_config cfg;
28 struct mmc mmc;
29 };
...
dts node

         sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                              "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";

...

Thanks,
- Kever

Simon Glass

2017-01-16 04:15 UTC #1 lore raw

Hi Kever,

Quoted 24 lines · Kever Yang

Hi Simon,
I met two issue when using of-platdata
1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant
 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                   ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before
numeric constant
 static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
                                          ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared here
(not in a function)
  .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
               ^
make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2

Quoted 6 lines

The dts node starts like this:

        sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",

"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...

That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.

Quoted 17 lines

2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use? for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
25 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
26 #endif
27 struct mmc_config cfg;
28 struct mmc mmc;
29 };
...
dts node

Quoted 3 lines

        sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
               compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                             "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";

I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)

One option is something like:

struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)

#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
        struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
        struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;

#endif
#endif

Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.

IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.

Another option would be for dtoc to #define each compatible string to the first one. If you think that would work, I could do a patch.

Regards,
Simon

Kever Yang

author

2017-02-13 09:23 UTC #2 lore raw

Hi Simon,

Quoted 68 lines · Simon Glass

Hi Kever,
Quoted 24 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
I met two issue when using of-platdata
1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant
  struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                    ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before
numeric constant
  static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
                                           ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared here
(not in a function)
   .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
                ^
make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2
Quoted 6 lines
The dts node starts like this:
         sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                 u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                 compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",
"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...
That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.
Quoted 16 lines
2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use? for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
25 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
26 #endif
27 struct mmc_config cfg;
28 struct mmc mmc;
29 };
...
dts node
Quoted 3 lines
         sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                              "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
One option is something like:
struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
         struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
         struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
#endif
#endif

Quoted 7 lines

Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.
IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.

Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel maintainers
have the same idea.

Quoted 3 lines

Another option would be for dtoc to #define each compatible string to the first one. If you think that would work, I could do a patch.

I think we can try with the first one in the driver for of-platdata,
this would have problem for the first compatible name is different but they share the same driver, like syscon. For syscon, you have resolved with a special dirver, not sure if other driver has the same problem.

Could you help to make a patch for this solution?

Thanks,
- Kever

Quoted 6 lines

Regards,
Simon

Jaehoon Chung

2017-02-13 09:51 UTC #3 lore raw

Quoted 73 lines · Kever Yang

Hi Simon,
Quoted 70 lines · Simon Glass
Hi Kever,
Quoted 24 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
I met two issue when using of-platdata
1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant
  struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                    ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before
numeric constant
  static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
                                           ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared here
(not in a function)
   .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
                ^
make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2
Quoted 6 lines
The dts node starts like this:
         sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                 u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                 compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",
"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...
That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.
Quoted 16 lines
2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use? for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
25 struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
26 #endif
27 struct mmc_config cfg;
28 struct mmc mmc;
29 };
...
dts node
Quoted 3 lines
         sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                              "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
One option is something like:
struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
         struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
         struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
#endif
#endif
Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 5 lines
IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.
Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel maintainers have the same idea.

does it use just "rockchip,dw-mshc"? Maybe this can be common compatible for rockchip. If it needs add the other compatible in future, it should be added the specific compatible at that time.

Quoted 25 lines

Quoted 3 lines
Another option would be for dtoc to #define each compatible string to the first one. If you think that would work, I could do a patch.
I think we can try with the first one in the driver for of-platdata,
this would have problem for the first compatible name is different but they share the same driver, like syscon. For syscon, you have resolved with a special dirver, not sure if other driver has the same problem.
Could you help to make a patch for this solution?
Thanks,
- Kever
Quoted 6 lines
Regards,
Simon
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot at lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Kever Yang

author

2017-02-14 01:09 UTC #4 lore raw

Hi Simon, Jaehoon,

Quoted 79 lines · Jaehoon Chung

Quoted 78 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
Quoted 75 lines · Simon Glass
Hi Kever,
Quoted 24 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
I met two issue when using of-platdata
1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant
   struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                     ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before
numeric constant
   static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 = {
                                            ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared here
(not in a function)
    .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
                 ^
make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2
Quoted 6 lines
The dts node starts like this:
          sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                  u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                  compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",
"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...
That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.
Quoted 7 lines
2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use? for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
Quoted 12 lines
   23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
   24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
   25         struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
   26 #endif
   27         struct mmc_config cfg;
   28         struct mmc mmc;
   29 };
...
dts node
          sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                 compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                               "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
One option is something like:
struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
          struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
          struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
#endif
#endif
Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.
IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 2 lines
Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel maintainers have the same idea.
does it use just "rockchip,dw-mshc"? Maybe this can be common compatible for rockchip. If it needs add the other compatible in future, it should be added the specific compatible at that time.

I don't think we will have a change in dts compatible for U-Boot dts, because we will always using dts
file from kernel, so we will use it as is.

We can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" for rk3288 and rk3399, here is the document.
and for dw-mshc:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/rockchip-dw-mshc.txt
* compatible: should be
- "rockchip,rk2928-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK2928 and following, before RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc", "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for
Rockchip RK3399

For the compatible name, there had some discuss before, like this patch:
https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/2372182

So for the of-platdata, we can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" to generate the structure.

Thanks,
- Kever

Quoted 24 lines

Quoted 21 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Another option would be for dtoc to #define each compatible string to the first one. If you think that would work, I could do a patch.
I think we can try with the first one in the driver for of-platdata,
this would have problem for the first compatible name is different but they share the same driver, like syscon. For syscon, you have resolved with a special dirver, not sure if other driver has the same problem.
Could you help to make a patch for this solution?
Thanks,
- Kever
Quoted 5 lines
Regards,
Simon
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot at lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot

Simon Glass

2017-02-16 20:43 UTC #5 lore raw

Hi Kever,

Quoted 121 lines · Kever Yang

Hi Simon, Jaehoon,
Quoted 92 lines · Jaehoon Chung
Quoted 90 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
Quoted 85 lines · Simon Glass
Hi Kever,
Quoted 27 lines · Kever Yang
Hi Simon,
I met two issue when using of-platdata
1. compitable name with '.'
I get compile error as below:
In file included from include/dt-structs.h:16:0,
from spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:3:
include/generated/dt-structs.h:26:35: error: expected identifier or ?(? before numeric constant
   struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 {
                                     ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:41:42: error: expected identifier or ?(? before
numeric constant
   static struct dtd_rockchip_rk3399_sdhci_5.1 dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000 =
{
                                            ^
spl/dts/dt-platdata.c:55:15: error: ?dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000? undeclared
here
(not in a function)
    .platdata = &dtv_sdhci_at_fe330000,
                 ^
make[2]: *** [spl/dts/dt-platdata.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [spl/u-boot-spl] Error 2
make: *** [__build_one_by_one] Error 2
Quoted 6 lines
The dts node starts like this:
          sdhci: sdhci at fe330000 {
                  u-boot,dm-pre-reloc;
                  compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-sdhci-5.1",
"arasan,sdhci-5.1";
...
That just involves replacing '.' with '_'. I sent a patch.
Quoted 9 lines
2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use?
for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using
the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
Quoted 12 lines
   23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
   24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
   25         struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
   26 #endif
   27         struct mmc_config cfg;
   28         struct mmc mmc;
   29 };
...
dts node
          sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                 compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                               "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
One option is something like:
struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
          struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
          struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
#endif
#endif
Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.
IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel maintainers
have the same idea.
does it use just "rockchip,dw-mshc"? Maybe this can be common compatible for rockchip.
If it needs add the other compatible in future, it should be added the specific compatible at that time.
I don't think we will have a change in dts compatible for U-Boot dts, because we will always using dts
file from kernel, so we will use it as is.
We can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" for rk3288 and rk3399, here is the document.
and for dw-mshc:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/rockchip-dw-mshc.txt
* compatible: should be
- "rockchip,rk2928-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK2928 and following, before RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc", "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for Rockchip
RK3399

Quoted 5 lines

For the compatible name, there had some discuss before, like this patch:
https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/2372182
So for the of-platdata, we can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" to generate the structure.

So in this case, as you saying that you need dtoc to #define the structs to be the same? Or can you do this yourself in a header file?

[..]

Regards,
Simon

Kever Yang

author

2017-04-25 02:29 UTC #6 lore raw

Hi Simon,

On 02/17/2017 04:43 AM, Simon Glass wrote:

[...]

Quoted 66 lines

Quoted 66 lines
Quoted 43 lines
Quoted 43 lines
Quoted 43 lines
Quoted 9 lines
2. multi compatible name
When a dts node have more than one compatible name, which is prefer to use?
for example, we have two dwmmc compatible name in rk3399, the tool is using
the first one,
while the source code using the last one.
"drivers/mmc/rockchip_dw_mmc.c"
Quoted 12 lines
    23 struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
    24 #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
    25         struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
    26 #endif
    27         struct mmc_config cfg;
    28         struct mmc mmc;
    29 };
...
dts node
           sdmmc: dwmmc at fe320000 {
                  compatible = "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc",
                                "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc";
I'm not sure of the best solution here (other than putting more on-chip SRAM in your devices hint hint :-)
One option is something like:
struct rockchip_mmc_plat {
#if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(OF_PLATDATA)
#ifdef CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK3288
           struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;
#elif defined(CONFIG_ROCKCHIP_RK399)
           struct dtd_rockchip_rk399_dw_mshc dtplat;
#endif
#endif
Obviously we don't want that as it is putting SoC-specific stuff in the driver.
IMO the compatible strings are being misused a bit. Can there not be a compatible string which is common to all rockchip devices which use this IP? Something like "rockchip,dw-mshc-v1"? Then you can avoid adding a new compatible string every time you use the same IP in a device.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Agree, but... this is from kernel, we can't control it unless all kernel maintainers
have the same idea.
does it use just "rockchip,dw-mshc"? Maybe this can be common compatible for rockchip.
If it needs add the other compatible in future, it should be added the specific compatible at that time.
I don't think we will have a change in dts compatible for U-Boot dts, because we will always using dts
file from kernel, so we will use it as is.
We can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" for rk3288 and rk3399, here is the document.
and for dw-mshc:
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/rockchip-dw-mshc.txt
* compatible: should be
- "rockchip,rk2928-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK2928 and following, before RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for Rockchip RK3288
- "rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc", "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc": for Rockchip
RK3399

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 5 lines
For the compatible name, there had some discuss before, like this patch:
https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/2372182
So for the of-platdata, we can use "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" to generate the structure.
So in this case, as you saying that you need dtoc to #define the structs to be the same? Or can you do this yourself in a header file?

Maybe what I want to say is not clear enough.
Instead of using new compatible for dts match, we should using the very first
compatible for of-platdata structure.
Like the document mentioned before:
"rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" for RK3288,
"rockchip,rk3399-dw-mshc", "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc"; for RK3399
"rockchip,rk3328-dw-mshc", "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc"; for RK3328

The "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" is always there if we are using the same controller,
we can use this "rockchip,rk3288-dw-mshc" to generate the of-platdata structure,
then we can always use "struct dtd_rockchip_rk3288_dw_mshc dtplat;" in mmc driver.

Could you help to send a patch for this? I'm really not good at python :(

Thanks,
- Kever

Quoted 8 lines

[..]
Regards,
Simon