From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pidgin.makrotopia.org (pidgin.makrotopia.org [185.142.180.65]) (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 5F18B29AD; Sat, 16 Dec 2023 01:17:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=makrotopia.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=makrotopia.org Received: from local by pidgin.makrotopia.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.96.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rEJIU-0001k3-0O; Sat, 16 Dec 2023 01:16:55 +0000 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2023 01:16:51 +0000 From: Daniel Golle To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Conor Dooley , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Chunfeng Yun , Vinod Koul , Kishon Vijay Abraham I , Felix Fietkau , John Crispin , Sean Wang , Mark Lee , Lorenzo Bianconi , Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , Heiner Kallweit , Russell King , Alexander Couzens , Qingfang Deng , SkyLake Huang , Philipp Zabel , netdev@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-phy@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v3 1/8] dt-bindings: phy: mediatek,xfi-pextp: add new bindings Message-ID: References: <20231212-renderer-strobe-2b46652cd6e7@spud> 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: On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 02:20:45PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Because it is only present in one of the two SerDes channels. > > Channel 0 needs the work-around, Channel 1 doesn't. > > Does the channel know its own number? As far as I know we can't infer the channel number by any of the registers default values. We could infer it from the base address, and that would kinda defy the purpose of having Device Tree to begin with in my feeling at least, but it would be possible, of course.