On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 12:08:06PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/10/2022 09:57, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > > Hi Camel, > > > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 08:46:27AM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> >> + - enum: > >>> >> + - mxl,gsw145-mdio > >>> > > >>> > Why "mdio" suffix? > >>> > >>> Inspired by others dsa chips. > >>> lan9303.txt: - "smsc,lan9303-mdio" for mdio managed mode > >>> lantiq-gswip.txt:- compatible : "lantiq,xrx200-mdio" for the MDIO bus > >>> inside the GSWIP > >>> nxp,sja1105.yaml: - nxp,sja1110-base-t1-mdio > >> > >> As I replied to Andrew, this is discouraged. > > > > Let's compare apples to apples, shall we? > > "nxp,sja1110-base-t1-mdio" is the 100Base-T1 MDIO controller of the > > NXP SJA1110 switch, hence the name. It is not a SJA1110 switch connected > > over MDIO. > > Thanks for clarifying. Then this could be fine. Let me then explain what > is discouraged: > 1. Adding bus suffixes to the compatible, so for example foo,bar LED > controller is on I2C bus, so you call it "foo,bar-i2c". > > 2. Adding device types to the compatible, if this is the only > function/variant of the device, so for example calling foo,bar LED > controller "foo,bar-led". This makes sense in case of multi functional > devices (PMICs, SoCs), but not standalone ones. > > So what do we have here? Is it one of the cases above? We are in agreement about SJA1110 (it's in case 2), this is what I said about Camel's comparison not being apples to apples. "mxl,gsw145-mdio" is in case 1, and I've also been recommending people to not add such suffixes to compatible strings (also see the discussion with Colin Foster about "mscc,vsc7512-switch" vs "mscc,vsc7512-ext-switch" to denote an "external" switch which is otherwise the exact same hw but on a different bus).
