On 13/09/2022 11:45, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: > Hello Krzysztof, > > On 13/09/22 14:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 12/09/2022 10:56, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: >> >>> required: >>> - compatible >>> - reg >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/ti,phy-gmii-sel.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/ti,phy-gmii-sel.yaml >>> index 016a37db1ea1..da7cac537e15 100644 >>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/ti,phy-gmii-sel.yaml >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/ti,phy-gmii-sel.yaml >>> @@ -53,12 +53,25 @@ properties: >>> - ti,am43xx-phy-gmii-sel >>> - ti,dm814-phy-gmii-sel >>> - ti,am654-phy-gmii-sel >>> + - ti,j7200-cpsw5g-phy-gmii-sel >>> >>> reg: >>> maxItems: 1 >>> >>> '#phy-cells': true >>> >>> + ti,qsgmii-main-ports: >>> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array >>> + description: | >>> + Required only for QSGMII mode. Array to select the port for >> >> Not really an array... >> >>> + QSGMII main mode. Rest of the ports are selected as QSGMII_SUB >>> + ports automatically. Any one of the 4 CPSW5G ports can act as the >>> + main port with the rest of them being the QSGMII_SUB ports. >>> + maxItems: 1 >> >> >> You say it is an array, but you have here just one item, so it is just >> uint32. Do you expect it to grow? If so, when? Why it cannot grow now? > > Thank you for reviewing the patch. > > I have defined it as an array because I plan to reuse this property for > other TI devices like J721e which supports up to two QSGMII main ports. > J7200 on the other hand can have at most one QSGMII main port, which is > why I have restricted the array size to one element as of this series. > In the upcoming patches that I will be posting for J721e, I will be > changing the maxItems to 2 for J721e's compatible while it will continue > to remain 1 for J7200's compatible. This is the reason for defining the > property as an array. I have an impression that I asked this and you already replied... so apologies for asking again. :) Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> Best regards, Krzysztof
