| Message ID | 20240510-b4-iio-axi-adc-dt-binding-tweak-v1-1-a1f633c4602c@baylibre.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: iio: adc: adi,axi-adc: tweak example node name | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| robh/checkpatch | success | |
| robh/patch-applied | success | |
| robh/dtbs-check | warning | build log |
| robh/dt-meta-schema | success |
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node > name seems appropriate. > > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> Cheers, Conor.
On Sat, 11 May 2024 14:00:40 +0100 Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. > > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important > > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node > > name seems appropriate. > > > > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip > > > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > > Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com> > Sure, I guess phy is sort of applicable here. Applied, > Cheers, > Conor.
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node > name seems appropriate. > > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > --- > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > index e1f450b80db2..9cad4c439045 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ additionalProperties: false > > examples: > - | > - axi-adc@44a00000 { > + phy@44a00000 { phy should be used when there's #phy-cells which is not the case here. 'adc' is somewhat standard. Or maybe it should be tied to #io-backend-cells. Until we have something defined as ti what it should be, we should just leave node names alone. Rob
On Mon, 13 May 2024 09:19:06 -0500 Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote: > > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. > > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important > > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node > > name seems appropriate. > > > > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip > > > > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > > index e1f450b80db2..9cad4c439045 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml > > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ additionalProperties: false > > > > examples: > > - | > > - axi-adc@44a00000 { > > + phy@44a00000 { > > phy should be used when there's #phy-cells which is not the case here. > 'adc' is somewhat standard. Or maybe it should be tied to > #io-backend-cells. > > Until we have something defined as ti what it should be, we should just > leave node names alone. > > Rob > Unapplied.
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml index e1f450b80db2..9cad4c439045 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ additionalProperties: false examples: - | - axi-adc@44a00000 { + phy@44a00000 { compatible = "adi,axi-adc-10.0.a"; reg = <0x44a00000 0x10000>; dmas = <&rx_dma 0>;
It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes. The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node name seems appropriate. [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com> --- Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) --- base-commit: 5e3c5871138da700796587aa5f096d39135f9d36 change-id: 20240510-b4-iio-axi-adc-dt-binding-tweak-054f97a78bff