From: Fuzzey, Martin <martin.fuzzey@flowbird.group> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 6:16 PM > > - gpr: phandle of SoC general purpose register mode. Required for > > wake on LAN > > - on some SoCs > > + on some SoCs. Register bits of stop mode control, the format is > > + <&gpr req_gpr req_bit>. > > + gpr is the phandle to general purpose register node. > > + req_gpr is the gpr register offset for ENET stop request. > > + req_bit is the gpr bit offset for ENET stop request. > > > > More of a DT binding changes policy question, do we care about supporting > the old no argument binding too? > > I don't think it actually matters seeing as the no argument gpr node binding > was only added recently anyway. > But it was backported to the stable trees and Documentation/bindings/ABI.txt > says > > "Bindings can be augmented, but the driver shouldn't break when given > the old binding. ie. add additional properties, but don't change the > meaning of an existing property. For drivers, default to the original > behaviour when a newly added property is missing." > > Myself I think this is overkill in this case and am fine with just changing the > binding without the driver handling the old case but that's Rob's call to make I > think. The patch set is to add argument binding, and driver also doesn't support wol without argument binding. As you know, current driver only wol feature requests the property. I am not understand why we need to support the old without argument binding. Welcome to your suggestion for the solution. And 'gpr' string is not good description for stop mode, I will change it to the string: ' fsl,stop-mode'.
