quoted
+ err = of_property_read_string(np, "phy_type", &phy_type);
+ if (err < 0)
+ return USBPHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA;
Why don't we use a u32 property type for the *phy-type*? IMHO we
should use string property only when the property should be
absolutely unambiguous (e.g., compatible property should be string).
If we would use u32-numbers in the compatible entry, this would also be
unambiguous, no? 0xd00dfeed would be the at24-driver. Pretty specific.
I don't mind having readable devicetrees. And we have it for ethernet
phys already with strings, so it would be consistent.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20130129/0b5575ea/attachment.sig>