On 11/21/24 01:27, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 20/11/2024 23:02, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
like "vdd-csiphy-0p9-supply" and "vdd-csiphy-1p2-supply"?
In theory, however I'd like to avoid adding endless strings of new names
into the driver code for each different power input.
I don't understand this argument, it's the same degree of endlessness as
the endlessness of new designed SoCs. Should it be stopped now or what's
the point here?
My argument is to represent the actual hardware instead of copying errors.
We can add this additional string name though in the interim between now
and refactor for the PHY API.
I don't see it as a good reason to copy an easy to correct mistake.
Also you put a description like "supply to PHY refclk pll block", but if I
remember correctly once you've said that the datasheet (of another SoC)
does not give any clues about the usage of the supply, thus it invalidates
the given description.
I'm surmising by extrapolation - that's "probably" what those are just
at different voltage levels based on previous iterations of this PHY.
But this is proven to be wrong, let me kindly ask you to align with the SoC
documentation here.
I'm just as happy not to describe this or to describe it as no mor that
the 1.2v supply etc.
Thank you for understanding.
--
Best wishes,
Vladimir
