[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190206135200.GA23409@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 14:52:00 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: net: add MDIO bus multiplexer driven
by a regmap device
On Wed, Feb 06, 2019 at 06:20:39AM +0000, Pankaj Bansal wrote:
> Add support for an MDIO bus multiplexer controlled by a regmap
> device, like an FPGA.
>
> Tested on a NXP LX2160AQDS board which uses the "QIXIS" FPGA
> attached to the i2c bus.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> V4:
> - No change
> V3:
> - No change
> V2:
> - New file describing the device tree bindings for regmap controlled devices'
> mdio mux
>
> .../bindings/net/mdio-mux-regmap.txt | 167 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 167 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mdio-mux-regmap.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mdio-mux-regmap.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8968f317965f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/mdio-mux-regmap.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,167 @@
> +Properties for an MDIO bus multiplexer controlled by a regmap
> +
> +This is a special case of a MDIO bus multiplexer. A regmap device,
> +like an FPGA, is used to control which child bus is connected. The mdio-mux
> +node must be a child of the device that is controlled by a regmap.
> +The driver currently only supports devices with upto 32-bit registers.
> +
> +Required properties in addition to the generic multiplexer properties:
> +
> +- reg : integer, contains the offset of the register that controls the bus
> + multiplexer. it can be 32 bit number.
> +
> +- mux-mask : integer, contains an 32 bit mask that specifies which
> + bits in the register control the actual bus multiplexer. The
> + 'reg' property of each child mdio-mux node must be constrained by
> + this mask.
Hi Pankaj
Maybe you can address the comment about not having a compatible flag
by commenting that this is a device tree fragment, which is expected
to appear inside the binding of some other device. It is not a
standalone device.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists