On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 01:22:15PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > It's not device on MDIO bus, but the MDIO controller's register itself > > > (this _CSR belongs to the parent, subnodes do not refer to it in any > > > way). The child device requires only _ADR (or whatever else is needed > > > for the case the DSA device is attached to SPI/I2C controllers). > > > > More and more the idea of standardizing the MDIOSerialBus() resource looks > > plausible. The _ADR() usage is a bit grey area in ACPI specification. Maybe > > someone can also make it descriptive, so Microsoft and others won't utilize > > _ADR() in any level of weirdness. > > I don't know if it makes any difference, but there are two protocols > spoken over MDIO, c22 and c45, specified in clause 22 and clause 45 of > the 802.3 specification. In some conditions, you need to specify which > protocol to speak to a device at a particular address. In DT we > indicate this with the compatible string, when maybe it should really > be considered as an extension of the address. > > If somebody does produce a draft for MDIOSerialBus() i'm happy to > review it. I also can review it. Marcin, would it be hard for you to prepare a formal proposal for ACPI specification? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
