On Sat, Nov 11, 2023 at 03:17:40PM +0530, Krishna Kurapati PSSNV wrote:
> On 11/11/2023 2:00 PM, Krishna Kurapati PSSNV wrote:
> > On 11/10/2023 6:58 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >>> phy-names:
> >>> minItems: 1
> >>> - maxItems: 2
> >>> - items:
> >>> - enum:
> >>> - - usb2-phy
> >>> - - usb3-phy
> >>> + maxItems: 8
> >>> + oneOf:
> >>> + - items:
> >>> + enum: [ usb2-phy, usb3-phy ]
> >>> + - items:
> >>> + pattern: "^usb[23]-port[0-3]$"
> >>
> >> Shouldn't this just be
> >>
> >> pattern: "^usb[23]-[0-3]$"
> >>
> >> so that it matches the names that are used by the nvidia bindings?
> >>
> >> We already have some inconsistency in that Amlogic uses a variant based
> >> on the legacy names that needlessly includes "phy" in the names:
> >>
> >> const: usb2-phy0
> >> const: usb2-phy1
> >> const: usb3-phy0
> >> ...
> >>
> >> I don't think we should be introducing a third naming scheme here so I
> >> suggest just following the nvidia bindings.
> >> > In that case, why don't we use "^usb[23]-phy[0-3]$". I think its close
> > to what we have on dwc3 core already today (usb2-phy/usb3-phy).
>
> I mean, it isn't needless. It is a phy and shouldn't the binding suggest
> that and include "-phy" in the name ?
No, adding a '-phy' suffix to each name is unnecessary since the
property is called 'phy-names'.
This is also documented:
For names used in {clock,dma,interrupt,reset}-names, do not add
any suffix, e.g.: "tx" instead of "txirq" (for interrupt).
https://docs.kernel.org/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.html
and we've already discussed this when I asked you to drop the likewise
redundant '_irq' suffix from the interrupt names.
Johan
