Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 14:01:27)
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 12:15:41)
> > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 1 file changed, 179 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > index 40db5aa0803c..650cd54f418e 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > @@ -28,6 +28,65 @@ aliases {
> > > chosen {
> > > stdout-path = "serial0:115200n8";
> > > };
> > > +
> > > + mtl_rx_setup: rx-queues-config {
> >
> > Is there a reason why this isn't a child of an ethernet node?
> >
> >
>
> I debated if it was more appropriate to:
>
> 1. make a duplicate in each ethernet node (ethernet0/1)
> 2. Put it in one and reference from both
> 3. have it floating around independent like this, similar to what is
> done in sa8155p-adp.dts[0]
>
> I chose 3 as it seemed cleanest, but if there's a good argument for a
> different approach I'm all ears!
I wonder if it allows the binding checker to catch bad properties by
having it under the ethernet node? That's the only thing I can think of
that may be improved, but I'll let binding reviewers comment here.
