On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 02:12:42PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Baruch Siach <baruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Hi Russell, >> > >> > On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:53:17PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> >> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 01:28:06PM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote: >> >> > Add device-tree binding documentation SFP transceivers. Support for SFP >> >> > transceivers has been recently introduced (drivers/net/phy/sfp.c). >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> > --- >> >> > >> >> > The SFP driver is on net-next. >> >> > >> >> > Not sure about the rate-select-gpio property name. The SFP+ standard >> >> > (not supported yet) uses two signals, RS0 and RS1. RS0 is compatible >> >> > with the SFP rate select signal, while RS1 controls the Tx rate. >> >> >> >> SFP+ is usable with this, but the platforms I have do not wire the >> >> rate select pins on the SFP+ sockets to GPIOs, but hard-wire them. >> > >> > So maybe naming this signal 'rate-select0-gpio' would make it more future >> > (SPF+) proof? Or 'rate-select-rx-gpio'? >> >> Just extend it by making it an array of 2 gpios. > > What do you do if you have only one rate select wired up and it doesn't > correspond with the first? Seems unlikely, but possible I guess. In that case, 2 properties is probably better. Otherwise, you'd have to put in -1 or 0 for the first phandle. Rob -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
