> I know, I noticed this the first time I tested the schema. But then
> I've looked at all the other PHY binding and not one has a compatible.
>
> I presume if there is a compatible, the devicetrees also need a
> compatible. So basically, "required: compatible" in the schema, right?
> But that is where the PHY maintainers don't agree.
It should not be required. The compatible is optional. The kernel is
happy without it. You can add a compatible to make the DT linter
happy, but you are only adding it to make the linter work. Hence it
needs to be optional. All real DT blobs are unlikely to have a
compatible, given that this PHY is known not to be broken in terms of
enumeration via its ID registers.
Andrew
