On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 08:51:26PM +0100, Patrick DELAUNAY wrote:
On 2/9/21 11:39 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 2/9/21 11:14 AM, Patrick Delaunay wrote: Hi,
[...]
diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/dwc2_udc_otg.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/dwc2_udc_otg.c index e3871e381e..ecac80fc11 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/dwc2_udc_otg.c +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/dwc2_udc_otg.c @@ -1176,7 +1176,7 @@ static int dwc2_udc_otg_remove(struct udevice *dev) static const struct udevice_id dwc2_udc_otg_ids[] = { { .compatible = "snps,dwc2" }, { .compatible = "brcm,bcm2835-usb" }, - { .compatible = "st,stm32mp1-hsotg", + { .compatible = "st,stm32mp15-hsotg", .data = (ulong)dwc2_set_stm32mp1_hsotg_params },
I have to point out the obvious, DT is ABI, this breaks ABI. However, do we care about out-of-tree DTs here ?
I know that the binding backward compatibility and "binary compatible" the is a key element of DT
for the Linux kernel (for example the latest kernel image should work with a old device tree).
The way we use DTs in U-Boot we don't enforce ABI because we allow for DTS and bindings to come in before they're fully stabilized in linux-next/similar and then it's required to re-sync them once they are final.