Hi Krzysztof,
Am 2022-03-13 10:47, schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
On 13/03/2022 01:25, Michael Walle wrote:
The MDIO controller has support to release the internal PHYs from
reset
by specifying a second memory resource. This is different between the
currently supported SparX-5 and the LAN966x. Add a new compatible to
distiguish between these two.
Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mscc-miim.txt | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mscc-miim.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mscc-miim.txt
index 7104679cf59d..a9efff252ca6 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mscc-miim.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mscc-miim.txt
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ Microsemi MII Management Controller (MIIM) / MDIO
=================================================
Properties:
-- compatible: must be "mscc,ocelot-miim"
+- compatible: must be "mscc,ocelot-miim" or "mscc,lan966x-miim"
No wildcards, use one, specific compatible.
I'm in a kind of dilemma here, have a look yourself:
grep -r "lan966[28x]-" Documentation
Should I deviate from the common "name" now? To make things
worse, there was a similar request by Arnd [1]. But the
solution feels like cheating ("lan966x" -> "lan966") ;)
On a side note, I understand that there should be no wildcards,
because the compatible should target one specific implementation,
right? But then the codename "ocelot" represents a whole series of
chips. Therefore, names for whole families shouldn't be used neither,
right?
-michael
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAK8P3a2kRhCOoXnvcMyqS-zK2WDZjtUq4aqOzE5VV=VMg=pVOA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
