On 18/10/2022 05:40, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 01:20:49PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 17/10/2022 10:53, Johan Hovold wrote: >>> Add bindings for the PCIe QMP PHYs found on SC8280XP. >>> >>> The PCIe2 and PCIe3 controllers and PHYs on SC8280XP can be used in >>> 4-lane mode or as separate controllers and PHYs in 2-lane mode (e.g. as >>> PCIe2A and PCIe2B). >>> >>> The configuration for a specific system can be read from a TCSR register. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml | 163 ++++++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 163 insertions(+) >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml >>> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml >>> new file mode 100644 >>> index 000000000000..82da95eaa9d6 >>> --- /dev/null >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml >> >> Filename based on compatible, so for example: >> >> qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml > > Ok, but as I mentioned in my reply to the previous patch, this file is > the one that is expected to be extended with new bindings. I would still propose to use compatible of this series and treat it as a family name of compatible or similar devices. What other choice we have? If new (third) PHY bindings appear, then rename older to "-legacies" and this one to "-legacy"? > > I can't seem to find where this naming scheme is documented now even if > I'm quite sure I've seen it before. Do you have a pointer? If you need the source of authority, then: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/YlhkwvGdcf4ozTzG@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ If you need unofficial documentation, then slides here: https://osseu2022.sched.com/event/15z0W If you need something official, that's on TODO list. :) > > And does this imply that the file name should also include the gen infix > of one of the original compatibles (e.g. > "qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-gen3x4-pcie-phy.yaml")? Since you already have here three compatibles, you cannot have one filename matching exactly all of them, so we already accept something generic. Therefore I proposed the common part - matching SoC component. Best regards, Krzysztof
