From: Josua Mayer <josua@solid-run.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-phy@lists.infradead.org" <linux-phy@lists.infradead.org>,
Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@nxp.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 phy 12/16] dt-bindings: phy: lynx-28g: add compatible strings per SerDes and instantiation
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 15:56:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b18dcd60-8e14-4328-82b1-f4e5c75cfe96@solid-run.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250924154534.cyyfi2aez46iu2sw@skbuf>
Am 24.09.25 um 17:45 schrieb Vladimir Oltean:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 08:54:29AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> +description: |
>> Don't need '|' if no formatting to preserve.
> Thanks, will drop.
>
>>> + "#address-cells":
>>> + const: 1
>>> + description: "Address cells for child lane nodes"
>> You don't need generic descriptions of common properties.
> Ok, I'll also drop the description from #size-cells but keep it in
> #phy-cells (less obvious).
>
>>> +
>>> + "#size-cells":
>>> + const: 0
>>> + description: "Size cells for child lane nodes"
>>> +
>>> "#phy-cells":
>>> + description: "Number of cells in PHY specifier (legacy binding only)"
>>> const: 1
>>>
>>> @@ -32,9 +124,51 @@ examples:
>>> soc {
>>> #address-cells = <2>;
>>> #size-cells = <2>;
>>> - serdes_1: phy@1ea0000 {
>>> - compatible = "fsl,lynx-28g";
>>> +
>>> + serdes_1: serdes@1ea0000 {
>>> + compatible = "fsl,lx2160a-serdes1";
>>> reg = <0x0 0x1ea0000 0x0 0x1e30>;
>>> - #phy-cells = <1>;
>>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>>> +
>>> + phy@0 {
>>> + reg = <0>;
>>> + #phy-cells = <0>;
>>> + };
>> There's really no difference between having child nodes 0-7 and 8 phy
>> providers vs. putting 0-7 into a phy cell arg and 1 phy provider.
>>
>> The only difference I see is it is more straight-forward to determine
>> what lanes are present in the phy driver if the driver needs to know
>> that. But you can also just read all 'phys' properties in the DT with a
>> &serdes_1 phandle and determine that. Is that efficient? No, but you
>> have to do that exactly once and probably has no measurable impact.
>>
>> With that, then can't you simply just add a more specific compatible:
>>
>> compatible = "fsl,lx2160a-serdes1", "fsl,lynx-28g";
>>
>> Then you maintain some compatibility.
>>
>> Rob
> With the patches that have been presented to you thus far -- yes, this
> is the correct conclusion, there is not much of a difference. But this
> is not all.
>
> If I want in the future to apply the properties from
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/transmit-amplitude.yaml to just
> one of the lanes, how would I do that with just 1 phy provider?
I believe it is possible for a driver to create multiple phy objects
during probe, and for the xlate function to return the correct one.
Then, whether you follow a phandle to the parent with 1 argument,
or a phandle to the phy child with 0 arguments provides same results.
The driver already creates a phy object for each lane with:
phy = devm_phy_create(&pdev->dev, NULL, &lynx_28g_ops);
Once the second argument is changed to a valid lane node,
it's properties will be accessible.
I prototyped this a while ago:
https://github.com/SolidRun/lx2160a_build/blob/develop-ls-5.15.71-2.2.0/patches/linux/0030-phy-lynx-28g-add-support-for-device-tree-per-lane-ph.patch
> It's not
> so clear. Compared to 8 phy providers, each with its OF node => much
> easier to structure and to understand.
>
> This is essentially what the discussion with Josua from v1 boils down to.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-24 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-23 19:44 [PATCH v2 phy 00/16] Lynx 28G improvements part 1 Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 01/16] phy: lynx-28g: remove LYNX_28G_ prefix from register names Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 02/16] phy: lynx-28g: don't concatenate lynx_28g_lane_rmw() argument "reg" with "val" and "mask" Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 03/16] phy: lynx-28g: use FIELD_GET() and FIELD_PREP() Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 04/16] phy: lynx-28g: convert iowrite32() calls with magic values to macros Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 05/16] phy: lynx-28g: restructure protocol configuration register accesses Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 06/16] phy: lynx-28g: make lynx_28g_set_lane_mode() more systematic Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 07/16] phy: lynx-28g: refactor lane->interface to lane->mode Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 08/16] phy: lynx-28g: distinguish between 10GBASE-R and USXGMII Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 09/16] phy: lynx-28g: configure more equalization params for 1GbE and 10GbE Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 10/16] phy: lynx-28g: use "dev" argument more in lynx_28g_probe() Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 11/16] phy: lynx-28g: improve lynx_28g_probe() sequence Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 12/16] dt-bindings: phy: lynx-28g: add compatible strings per SerDes and instantiation Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 20:37 ` Rob Herring (Arm)
2025-09-23 20:57 ` Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-24 13:54 ` Rob Herring
2025-09-24 15:45 ` Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-24 15:56 ` Josua Mayer [this message]
2025-09-25 8:03 ` Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-25 13:05 ` Rob Herring
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 13/16] phy: lynx-28g: probe on per-SoC and per-instance compatible strings Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 14/16] phy: lynx-28g: add support for 25GBASER Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 15/16] phy: lynx-28g: truly power the lanes up or down Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-24 10:09 ` Josua Mayer
2025-09-24 13:06 ` Vladimir Oltean
2025-09-24 15:57 ` Josua Mayer
2025-09-23 19:44 ` [PATCH v2 phy 16/16] phy: lynx-28g: implement phy_exit() operation Vladimir Oltean
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=b18dcd60-8e14-4328-82b1-f4e5c75cfe96@solid-run.com \
--to=josua@solid-run.com \
--cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ioana.ciornei@nxp.com \
--cc=kishon@kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-phy@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
--cc=vladimir.oltean@nxp.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