On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node > name seems appropriate. > > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > index e1f450b80db2..9cad4c439045 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ additionalProperties: false > > examples: > - | > - axi-adc@44a00000 { > + phy@44a00000 { phy should be used when there's #phy-cells which is not the case here. 'adc' is somewhat standard. Or maybe it should be tied to #io-backend-cells. Until we have something defined as ti what it should be, we should just leave node names alone. Rob
