[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YwpCJULGjuw4dK7W@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2022 18:11:17 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/7] dt-bindings: net: pse-dt: add bindings
for generic PSE controller
> Ok, so current plan is:
> - rename this driver and binding to pse-regulator
> - i will integrate the "ieee802.3-pairs" property, since this driver
> need to know which field it need to fill in the ethtool response (PSE
> vs PoDL PSE)
It seems odd to have a property which only purpose is to supply
userspace with some information. If all you have is a single
regulator, does it even matter if it is PSE vs PoDL PSE?
If you think it does matter, i would probably have two compatibles.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists