From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com (lelv0143.ext.ti.com [198.47.23.248]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE9C757F8; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 10:43:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712227441; cv=none; b=UP3ZU3wu7MSGdDCkULYABfTrOaJtLBbK1W1vQHYlth/BmE1QOZAxkBzZ1QaH6kRh5zRnwh1a5eKZFzikwgYdFsqcSG+Nd0AG13e/mlIPWTZF9S7r8LhvZ6gve/Kui/qnKWUXWVKUms1MNKmJtBDIR6DSXEEGOsdGrbcnNZfvemk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712227441; c=relaxed/simple; bh=im0U2lGAC8oYpE4ZyZgF/GiHDRRRhKqeeMqneU193vI=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hkLX73oP34etqWhXqaLB9acT6IcKIB+6dVFPes6KePGcJiRtcC4IFPT0C+3VxCs3Dgt7eJ+3bw2xiF9bPb9J+GopuC8TKjXd6N/12Cd0+EOR5uThFbWbB9dR2UqBzbMD3nuf1a7jtcC0yqp1UDBBu/AZPRiEp3mYlDXvsptIUuo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b=w5b/AW7V; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.47.23.248 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ti.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="w5b/AW7V" Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 434Ahldv015728; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 05:43:47 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1712227427; bh=M+oBweR6MlGgVONdsaWLLnpajziUTagpZ5rITcOUqaY=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=w5b/AW7VHoQSlNeBbZz0yLBVpKFDTeWvt78mavZzHJff0c1kPYjIcDWQJH1uPUOdA /sIDcOCHgFmU6RQ9zmCMoB9VlvG8D1+epA6ipEXQmPXN2mVjfZTiGDCxA/GugxjCi0 bWA74OTt9pyVqkiyB4ob5qbCl5mq8LyIVTHXkFgA= Received: from DLEE107.ent.ti.com (dlee107.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.37]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 434Ahlj5048907 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 4 Apr 2024 05:43:47 -0500 Received: from DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) by DLEE107.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.37) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 05:43:47 -0500 Received: from lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (10.180.75.249) by DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2507.23 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 05:43:47 -0500 Received: from localhost (uda0492258.dhcp.ti.com [172.24.227.9]) by lelvsmtp6.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 434AhkTn107605; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 05:43:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 16:13:46 +0530 From: Siddharth Vadapalli To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: Siddharth Vadapalli , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am62p: use eFuse MAC Address for CPSW3G Port 1 Message-ID: <55d82eb2-faab-4019-ab9c-55063bb4849e@ti.com> References: <20240404081845.622707-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com> <18eb0e55-38ad-44f9-90b7-1917d8c0d5bb@linaro.org> <75b53dda-23aa-4915-944a-4d9a619bd165@ti.com> <903ad855-ab26-4ef3-80bd-249917056188@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 12:31:47PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 04/04/2024 12:16, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote: > >>> I was following the convention that other mfd-syscon compatible nodes > >>> seemed to be using: > >>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/41bccc98fb7931d63d03f326a746ac4d429c1dd3/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-am65-main.dtsi#L502 > >>> The node is: > >>> dss_oldi_io_ctrl: dss-oldi-io-ctrl@41e0 > >>> corresponding to the compatible: > >>> "ti,am654-dss-oldi-io-ctrl" > >>> which was added by commit: > >>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/cb523495ee2a5938fbdd30b8a35094d386c55c12 > >> > >> So if that one was wrong, then what? I don't know really what type of > >> device is it, but just because one contributor called it that way, does > >> not mean you should keep going. Maybe investigate why that contributor > >> did not decide to follow Devicetree spec recommendation? > > > > Yes, it doesn't justify the convention. I seem to have picked a wrong > > example when figuring out the convention for naming the node. I plan to > > name it as: > > ethernet-mac-efuse > > while retaining the label "cpsw_mac_efuse" since CPSW is the name of the > > Ethernet Switch on the SoC. Please let me know if it is acceptable. I > > will post the v3 patch based on your feedback. > > Label is fine, there is no restriction/guideline on labels, so choose > descriptive or something useful for you. Just the node name. If this is > syscon, then usually system-controller. If this is efuse, then maybe > efuse, even though previously I was looking at this more as a syscon. I will change it to "ethernet-mac-syscon" to indicate the MMIO nature of the node. eFuse might give the wrong impression, despite the fact that the contents of the register are based on the contents of an eFuse. I will post the v3 patch with the following changes: 1. Rename "cpsw-mac-efuse" as "ethernet-mac-syscon" 2. Rename "cpsw_mac_efuse" as "cpsw_mac_syscon" Regards, Siddharth.