From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 714863EE1FD; Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:23:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782815002; cv=none; b=RncUNqWCgQomFOkDhotmzxjYTWGKpJrrzj4yoxpDCpKzv3GbLAPMLB2mZFO50kOHGmnvmN/fEa8pl05WwKvNpjxC0H8BK/o75RrobsCq1z6zQI5PWE9U32OYrFfHvEKcH+MQ7J1roR5TgNCFYp4/TTlvKb2smW/pnsEpb6w7p54= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782815002; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DHteYR30RM1d5bPe1YPpE3im/+JF9z4CCZ3DJ0TOyls=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=eAzm3/4ck3PC97bHAaB1YOG3zkYdwCqBvw6Iewq40/xnJkkJld1JhJMCADxUNMzkdiVpg8HUkpnuEmiHu98lrAUdJXuBkMoYa/CwtIao8KvrfSPPh1NDHa4/xjNAvujIq16VOxZ1W1YXZOH8+BVL29lU46H+kJyezNkNVx8lanU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XyBy2bQc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XyBy2bQc" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D8E41F000E9; Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:23:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1782815001; bh=hGencHR1rqX4oR1/IqjhQFQRDCZNECISdf4kfhlCG0g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=XyBy2bQcCpF6LYOuss3LRRJeQlCYc8dvpcRUfK1ZagqxIqYPz5p0WwpsaFIQBW9vW IlOw0fNJJFpKyyg9iic4NuDm02LrPL3qHKHefNIo7aqpS80LB6lvKqynKgGBvzbREO 4ZvHpLHCO720wCr2vYLratFlyl/gE//Y7cU/ye1HTlkGVUfMCklP+eJYoqc/HjpTxw MZXb8/jIFyvGrFJo82KLZha9Mhc3PkZrDWmDJGTsxLZUbwokWPsckf2VwK19WHIVoz +qkE0c3p44BQOkrv6SHKYZtWI+7gQ0YPbPbglot3g6oJ2J7Z4K4XFytNkclDQawEPq nxmkjQc7MH7Bg== Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 15:53:16 +0530 From: Vinod Koul To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski , Bjorn Andersson , Konrad Dybcio , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Giuseppe Cavallaro , Chen-Yu Tsai , Jernej Skrabec , Neil Armstrong , Kevin Hilman , Jerome Brunet , Shawn Guo , Fabio Estevam , Jan Petrous , s32@nxp.com, Mohd Ayaan Anwar , Romain Gantois , Magnus Damm , Maxime Ripard , Christophe Roullier , Radu Rendec , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Drew Fustini , linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, imx@lists.linux.dev, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, sophgo@lists.linux.dev, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Bartosz Golaszewski , Bartosz Golaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v11 1/7] dt-bindings: phy: document the serdes PHY on sa8255p Message-ID: References: <20260629-qcom-sa8255p-emac-v11-0-1b7fb95b51f9@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260629-qcom-sa8255p-emac-v11-1-1b7fb95b51f9@oss.qualcomm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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 29-06-26, 16:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Russell King asked me to put the PHY logic for SCMI pm domains into the PHY > > driver instead of the MAC driver where it was previously. Instead of cramming > > both HLOS and firmware handling into the same driver, I figured it makes more > > sense to have a dedicated, cleaner driver as the two share very little code (if > > any). > > I think you are mixing up DT bindings and driver implementation? Should the bindings change if we have different driver and firmware implementations? Isn't binding supposed to be agnostic of implementations..? -- ~Vinod