From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>,
scottwood@freescale.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, afleming@freescale.com
Subject: Re: phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:24:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100210192411.GH27173@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa686aa41002101112o66a74f60jc65fdffb48fd7213@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:12:14PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:37 AM, M. Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
> > There are times that you'd want a list of PHY addresses to use. ?This
> > suggests a bitmask, but I don't know if they are common enough to
> > warrant the extra burden on the usual case...
> Are you talking a single MAC attached to multiple PHYs? If so, then
> the current device tree binding doesn't support this, but it would be
> easy to extend the current binding by making the phy-handle property a
> list of phy nodes phandes.
There's also the entertaining case I've dealt with (pre device tree but
actually on PowerPC) where the MAC has multiple PHYs attached but they
should only be exposed to userspace and the driver should rely on MII
configuration provided by userspace without touching them.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-10 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Acqp3tpO+gBYUakZQ7SaeBzVIkh6WA==>
[not found] ` <4dfe033d-c308-45e0-9c7e-9fc60c6cad8f@SG2EHSMHS013.ehs.local>
[not found] ` <4dfe033d-c308-45e0-9c7e-9fc60c6cad8f-RaUQJvECHivT7m58JnLnSLjjLBE8jN/0@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-10 16:43 ` phy address in the device tree, vs auto probing Grant Likely
2010-02-10 16:52 ` John Linn
2010-02-10 18:14 ` Grant Likely
[not found] ` <fa686aa41002101014s43682e3cra55854b82a40bb5f-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-10 18:28 ` Scott Wood
[not found] ` <4B72FAB2.5000804-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-10 18:37 ` M. Warner Losh
2010-02-10 19:12 ` Grant Likely
2010-02-10 19:24 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2010-02-10 18:30 ` Mitch Bradley
[not found] ` <4B72FB38.7080909-D5eQfiDGL7eakBO8gow8eQ@public.gmane.org>
2010-02-10 18:35 ` Mitch Bradley
2010-02-10 18:40 ` Fleming Andy-AFLEMING
2010-02-10 19:20 ` Grant Likely
2010-02-10 19:46 ` Andy Fleming
2010-02-10 19:57 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100210192411.GH27173@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=afleming@freescale.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=imp@bsdimp.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox