On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 09:31:20AM -0700, S?ren Brinkmann wrote:

quoted

quoted

 - the marvell compatible strings are used in our vendor tree. They
   aren't used anywhere but in our vendor tree. I though keeping them is
   nice since it identifies the PHY fully. And in case that level of
   detail is needed at some point it is already there.

DT is complex enough already, don't include useless compatible strings
in mainline - people will see and tend to blindly copy. Ideally your
vendor tree would use the standard property :|

There are different opinions on this. I also heard to just add such
strings, so in case this level of differentiation becomes necessary at
some later point, it is already existing.

In some cases, yes, and they should be docuemented in the binding, of
course.

But there is already a standard compatible string format to uniquely
identify a phy, so in this case another string is not justified, and
just creates confusion about what is correct.

Jason