Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Aug 2018 10:24:13 +0200 | From | Quentin Schulz <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/10] dt-bindings: phy: add DT binding for Microsemi Ocelot SerDes muxing |
| |
Hi Andrew,
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 03:34:48PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > +Required properties: > > + > > +- compatible: should be "mscc,vsc7514-serdes" > > +- #phy-cells : from the generic phy bindings, must be 3. The first number > > + defines the kind of Serdes (1 for SERDES1G_X, 6 for > > + SERDES6G_X), the second defines the macros in the specified > > + kind of Serdes (X for SERDES1G_X or SERDES6G_X) and the > > + last one defines the input port to use for a given SerDes > > + macro, > > It looks like there are some space vs tab issues here. >
Yup.
> > + > > +Example: > > + > > + serdes: serdes { > > Maybe this should be serdes-mux? The SERDES itself should have some > registers somewhere. If you ever decide to make use of phylink, > e.g. to support SFP, you are going to need to know if the SERDES is > up. So you might need to add the actual SERDES device, in addition to > the mux for the SERDES. >
I'm not sure to follow.
To be honest, I might have mislead you. The whole configuration of the serdes is in the hsio register address space. For now, muxing is the only reason there is a driver for the serdes but there are other things that can be configured (though not used yet): de/serializer, input/output buffers, PLL, ... configuration registers for the SerDes.
So I think I should remove the mention to muxing and just say in the cover letter and commit log it's for muxing the SerDes among other configurations.
So I think we're good with the current driver and DT, just poor wording on my side for the commit log/cover letter. Do you agree?
Quentin [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |