[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f2a29c57-be8c-88c2-1c75-f6e5d1164b8f@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2022 12:45:54 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@....com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 2/9] dt-bindings: net: Expand pcs-handle to
an array
On 12/07/2022 17:59, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
>> However before implementing this, please wait for more feedback. Maybe
>> Rob or net folks will have different opinions.
>
> We decided on "pcs-handle" for PCS for several drivers, to be consistent
> with the situation for network PHYs (which are "phy-handle", settled on
> after we also had "phy" and "phy-device" and decided to deprecate these
> two.
>
> Surely we should have consistency within the net code - so either "phy"
> and "pcs" or "phy-handle" and "pcs-handle" but not a mixture of both?
True. Then the new property should be "pcs-handle-names"?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists