On 2.02.2025 3:35 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 01/02/2025 16:56, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 27.01.2025 9:26 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 04:31:18AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> (Almost?) all QMP PHYs come with both a "full reset" ("phy") and a
>>>> "retain certain registers" one ("phy_nocsr").
>>>>
>>>> Drop the maxItems=1 constraint for resets and reset_names as we go
>>>> ahead and straighten out the DT usage. After that's done (which
>>>> will involve modifying some clock drivers etc.), we may set
>>>> *min*Items to 2, bar some possible exceptions.
>>>
>>> You drop minItems now, so that's a bit confusing. If all devices have
>>> two resets, just change in top-level resets the minItems -> 2 now and
>>> mention that it does not affect the ABI, because Linux will support
>>> missing reset and it describes the hardware more accurately.
>>
>> This will generate a ton of warnings and resolving them may take an
>> additional cycle, as I'd need to get things merged through clk too,
>> so I thought this is a good transitional solution
>
> I still don't understand why existing devices now get 1 reset, while
> previously they had minItems:2.
Hm, right..
Would it make sense to just remove the else: branch?
Konrad
