On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 1:42 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 10:41:23AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 13/04/2023 04:34, Changhuang Liang wrote: > > >>>>> + lane_maps: > > >>>> > > >>>> Why did this appear? Underscores are not allowed. It looks like you > > >>>> re-implement some standard property. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> Will change to lane-maps. > > >>> Yes, according to Vinod advice, lane mapping table use device tree > > >>> to parse makes sense. > > >> > > >> Hm, I have a feeling that I saw such property, so you should dig into > > >> existing and in-flight bindings. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> Krzysztof > > >> > > > > > > A standard property? Like "clocks" or "resets"? > > > > Like lane-polarities now submitted to one MIPI. > > > > data-lanes perhaps? Except that is for the controller's endpoint rather than the phy. Presumably if the controller knows the mapping, then it can tell the phy if it needs the information. IOW, don't just copy 'data-lanes' to the phy. Follow the normal patterns. Rob
