On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 5:56 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 05:39:07PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 3:26 AM Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > + mdio {
> > > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > > + phy1: phy@1 {
> > > > + #phy-cells = <0>;
> > >
> > > Hi Linus
> > >
> > > phy-cells is not part of the Ethernet PHY binding.
> >
> > Nevertheless:
> >
> > CHECK Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/intel,ixp4xx-ethernet.example.dt.yaml
> > /var/linus/linux-nomadik/build-ixp4/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/intel,ixp4xx-ethernet.example.dt.yaml:
> > phy@1: '#phy-cells' is a required property
> > From schema:
> > /home/linus/.local/lib/python3.9/site-packages/dtschema/schemas/phy/phy-provider.yaml
> >
> > It has been hardcoded as required into the dtschema python package.
> > Looks like this:
> >
> > properties:
> > $nodename:
> > pattern: "^(|usb-|usb2-|usb3-|pci-|pcie-|sata-)phy(@[0-9a-f,]+)*$"
> >
> > "#phy-cells": true
> >
> > phy-supply: true
> >
> > required:
> > - "#phy-cells"
> >
> > additionalProperties: true
> >
> > If this is wrong I bet Rob needs to hear about it.
>
> That is the wrong sort of PHY. That is a generic PHY, not a PHY, aka
> Ethernet PHY.
It is a bit confusing :D not to mention that the term
"phy" or "physical interface" as I suppose it is meant to
be understood is a bit ambiguous to begin with.
> Maybe you need to change the label to ethernet-phy ?
Yeah that works, I'll do that.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
