Re: [PATCH RFC v3 3/6] dt-bindings: phy: cp110-utmi-phy: add compatible string for armada-38x

Josua Mayer
2024-07-22T15:49:44Z

Am 22.07.24 um 17:45 schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski:
> On 22/07/2024 17:31, Josua Mayer wrote:
>>>>       - compatible
>>>>       - reg
>>>>       - "#address-cells"
>>>>       - "#size-cells"
>>>>   - if:
>>>>       not:
>>>>         properties:
>>>>           reg-names:
>>>>             allOf:
>>>>               - contains:
>>>>                   const: usb-cfg
>>>>               - contains:
>>>>                   const: utmi-cfg
>>>>     then:
>>>>       required:
>>>>         - marvell,system-controller
>>>>
>>>> This works okay for any combinations of reg-names.
>>> ??? I expected this to be per variant.
>> As in by compatible string?
> Yes, each device has fixed properties, at least usually.
>
>>>> However when device-tree is missing reg-names all together,
>>>> marvell,system-controller is not marked required.
>>>>
>>>> Would it be acceptable to make reg-names required?
>>> I don't understand what you want to achieve.
>> When there are both usb-cfg and utmi-cfg regs,
>> then marvell,system-controller is optional,
>>
>> regardless of armada 380 or 8k.
> Whether the device has additional MMIO address space, depends on type of
> the device, not on some other properties. IOW, either you have here
> second reg or not. The hardware has or has not.

At least Armada 8K and Armada 388 both have them (physically).

The difference is one of them uses syscon for access.

Consequently, would it be better then to always require all 3?

(In driver I could use lack of syscon handle to decide,
currently I use presence of regs by name)

sincerely
Josua Mayer