linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 2/8] Documentation: bindings: add the Berlin SATA PHY

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140721090423.GD32208@kwain>
Date:	Mon, 21 Jul 2014 11:04:23 +0200
From:	Antoine Ténart 
	<antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Cc:	Antoine Ténart 
	<antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>,
	sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com, tj@...nel.org, kishon@...com,
	alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com,
	thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, zmxu@...vell.com,
	jszhang@...vell.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/8] Documentation: bindings: add the Berlin SATA PHY

Hi,

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 09:27:28PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 07/18/2014 04:30 PM, Antoine Ténart wrote:
> 
> >diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/berlin-sata-phy.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/berlin-sata-phy.txt
> >new file mode 100644
> >index 000000000000..88f8c23384c0
> >--- /dev/null
> >+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/berlin-sata-phy.txt
> >@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> >+Berlin SATA PHY
> >+---------------
> >+
> >+Required properties:
> >+- compatible: should be "marvell,berlin2q-sata-phy"
> >+- address-cells: should be 1
> >+- size-cells: should be 0
> >+- phy-cells: from the generic PHY bindings, must be 1
> 
>    It's "#address-cells", "#size-cells", and "#phy-cells".

Sure.

> 
> >+- reg: address and length of the register
> >+- clocks: reference to the clock entry
> >+
> >+Sub-nodes:
> >+Each PHY should be represented as a sub-node.
> 
>    Then "#phy-cells" should also belong to the sub-nodes.

No, because the PHY provider is still the parent.

Antoine

-- 
Antoine Ténart, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/