On Wednesday 25 February 2015 16:24:06 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Should I run this by Alan Stern?

I've added him to Cc here. He clearly didn't know the background about
the DT binding change, and should not need to, but he may have an opinion
on what names we should use.

Arnd, should I re patch the ehci-platform driver to avoid phy-names 
entirely? Alan, if not do you have an opinion on what the usb phy names 
should be? The current patch uses "usbp" + port number such as "usbp0" , 
"usbp1" etc

I think avoiding the phy names would be best here, but it requires a
kernel API change first, because we do not have a way to get a phy
by index as we do for other subsystems (e.g. clocks or gpios).

	Arnd