Re: [PATCH net-next v11 1/7] dt-bindings: phy: document the serdes PHY on sa8255p
Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.infradead.lists.linux-amlogic,dev.linux.lists.imx,dev.linux.lists.linux-sunxi,dev.linux.lists.sophgo,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.infradead.lists.linux-rockchip,org.kernel.vger.linux-arm-msm,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-mips,org.kernel.vger.linux-renesas-soc,org.kernel.vger.netdev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 30/06/2026 12:23, Vinod Koul wrote: > On 29-06-26, 16:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >>> Russell King asked me to put the PHY logic for SCMI pm domains into the PHY >>> driver instead of the MAC driver where it was previously. Instead of cramming >>> both HLOS and firmware handling into the same driver, I figured it makes more >>> sense to have a dedicated, cleaner driver as the two share very little code (if >>> any). >> >> I think you are mixing up DT bindings and driver implementation? > > Should the bindings change if we have different driver and firmware > implementations? Isn't binding supposed to be agnostic of > implementations..? I did not follow earlier discussions, so I do not know Russell arguments, but in general it's true that driver choices should not influence binding decisions. IOW, you need to figure out which real device is part of power domain and add the power-domains to that device node (that device). Best regards, Krzysztof _______________________________________________ linux-amlogic mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-amlogic