On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 04:40:11PM +0530, Krishna Kurapati PSSNV wrote: > On 5/16/2023 4:29 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Sun, May 14, 2023 at 11:19:09AM +0530, Krishna Kurapati wrote: > >> + interrupts: > >> + maxItems: 7 > >> + interrupt-names: > >> + items: > >> + - const: dp_hs_phy_irq > >> + - const: dm_hs_phy_irq > >> + - const: ss_phy_irq > > > > I assume that these are only for the first port, and that you need to > > define these interrupts also for ports 2-4. > I wanted to add them when wakeup-source is enabled but since you > mentioned that these must be added now and driver support can be added > later, I will make a patch separately for this in v9. > Can I use the following notation for the new interrupts ? > > dp_hs_port2_irq > dm_hs_port2_irq > dp_hs_port3_irq > dm_hs_port3_irq > dp_hs_port4_irq > dm_hs_port4_irq > > > That way the interrupt names for first port will be same as ones for > single port. For consistency, I'd say: use the same scheme also for port1. Perhaps "port" is unnecessary too. And since these are getting new names, you can drop the redundant "_irq" suffix as you did for the power-event lines. For example: pwr_event_1 dp_hs_phy_1 dm_hs_phy_1 ss_phy_1 ... > Wanted to clarify this before I make a formal patch. Note that I have some more comments on the remaining patches in the series that you may want to wait for before posting v9. Johan
