On 02/10/2022 10:23, Marcin Wojtas wrote: >niedz., 2 paź 2022 o 10:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski ><krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): >> >> On 01/10/2022 17:53, Michał Grzelak wrote: >> > Hi Krzysztof, >> > >> > Thanks for your comments and time spent on reviewing my patch. >> > All of those improvements will be included in next version. >> > Also, I would like to know your opinion about one. >> > >> >>> + >> >>> + marvell,system-controller: >> >>> + $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle >> >>> + description: a phandle to the system controller. >> >>> + >> >>> +patternProperties: >> >>> + '^eth[0-9a-f]*(@.*)?$': >> >> >> >> The name should be "(ethernet-)?port", unless anything depends on >> >> particular naming? >> > >> > What do you think about pattern "^(ethernet-)?eth[0-9a-f]+(@.*)?$"? >> > It resembles pattern found in net/ethernet-phy.yaml like >> > properties:$nodename:pattern:"^ethernet-phy(@[a-f0-9]+)?$", while >> > still passing `dt_binding_check' and `dtbs_check'. It should also >> > comply with your comment. >> >> Node names like ethernet-eth do not make much sense because they contain >> redundant ethernet or eth. AFAIK, all other bindings like that call >> these ethernet-ports (or sometimes shorter - ports). Unless this device >> is different than all others? >> > >IMO "^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9]+$" for the subnodes' names could be fine >(as long as we don't have to modify the existing .dtsi files) - there >is no dependency in the driver code on that. Indeed, driver's code isn't dependent; however, there is a dependency on 'eth[0-2]' name in all relevant .dts and .dtsi files, e.g.: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm/boot/dts/armada-375.dtsi#L190 https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm64/boot/dts/marvell/armada-cp11x.dtsi#L72 Ports under 'ethernet' node are named eth[0-2], thus those and all .dts files including the above would have to be modified to pass through `dtbs_check'. Best regards, Michał
