Re: [PATCH] DT: net: document Ethernet bindings in one place

[Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov-M4DtvfQ/ZS1MRgGoP+s0PdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>]

Hello.

On 02/11/2014 01:05 AM, Grant Likely wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>         I'm afraid that's too late, it has spread very far, so that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of_get_phy_mode() handles that property, not "phy-connection-type".

>>>>>>>>>>>> Uggg, I guess this is a case of a defacto standard then if the kernel
>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't even support it.

>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe I forgot to CC you on patch sent to Grant only, I sent a patch a
>>>>>>>>>>> while ago for of_get_phy_mode() to look for both "phy-mode" and
>>>>>>>>>>> "phy-connection-type" since the former has been a Linux invention, but
>>>>>>>>>>> the latter is ePAPR specified.

>>>>>>>>>> Here is a link to the actual patch in question, not sure which tree
>>>>>>>>>> Grant applied it to though:

>>>>>>>>>> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1311.2/00048.html

>>>>>>>>>         It's not the patch mail, it's Grant's "applied" reply, patch is mangled in
>>>>>>>>> this reply, and I couldn't follow the thread. Here's the actual patch mail:

>>>>>>>>> http://marc.info/?l=devicetree&m=138449662807254

>>>>>>>>         Florian, I didn't find this patch in Grant's official tree, so maybe you
>>>>>>>> should ask him where is the patch already?

>>>>>>> Sorry, I accidentally dropped it. It will be in the next merge window.

>>>>>>        Already saw it, thanks. Would that it was in 3.14 instead of course, so
>>>>>> that I could use "phy-connection-type" in my binding...

>>>>> Is 3.14 broken because of missing the patch? If so I'll get it merged as
>>>>> a bug fix.

>>>>       No, it's not. I could have used "phy-connection-type" in my binding
>>>> destined for 3.15 and document it as a preferred property as well.

>>> You still can. We just need to make sure that your patch is applied on

>>      Patches.

>>> top of the phy-connection-type patch.

>>      I'm not sure this trick is possible if the patches are merged via the
>> different trees...

> There are two ways to do it. A) by having a common merge commit
> containing that patch and merged into both branches, or B) just merging
> the patch in the same tree.

> Normally I'd suggest B), but I've already picked up the patch and I try
> very hard not to rebase my commit tree. However, since the branch is
> stable, you can ask for my branch to be merged into the net branch
> before applying the dependant patches. The relevant commit id is
> cf4c9eb5a4, and it is in my devicetree/next branch on
> git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux

    David, would it be possible for you to merge this into net-next?

> g.

WBR, Sergei

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html