> Should I add the proper description in the bindings ? Description of the > properties are somehow short. However will expand the description. Yes, please expand the description. For well known concepts, we can keep the binding description short. But i would not consider this a well known concept, so we need to spell out in detail what it is. My knowledge of transmission lines and termination is not so good.... So this configures the resistor on the PHY outputs. Do PHY inputs also need termination resistors? Could there be PHYs which also allow such resistors to be configured? Are there use cases where you need asymmetric termination resistors? My questions are trying to lead to an answer to your question: > Should I rename then "mac-series-termination-ohms" to > "output-mac-series-termination-ohms" or similar ? We should think about this from the general case, not one specific PHY, and ideally from thinking about the physics of termination. https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/524620/impedance-termination-of-marvell-phy This seems to suggest RGMII only has termination resistors at the outputs. So "mac-series-termination-ohms" would be O.K. Andrew
