Hi Krzysztof,

-----Original Message-----
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Sent: 19 September 2025 05:59 AM
To: Pritam Manohar Sutar <redacted>; vkoul@kernel.org;
kishon@kernel.org; robh@kernel.org; krzk+dt@kernel.org;
conor+dt@kernel.org; alim.akhtar@samsung.com; andre.draszik@linaro.org;
peter.griffin@linaro.org; kauschluss@disroot.org;
ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@gmail.com; igor.belwon@mentallysanemainliners.org;
m.szyprowski@samsung.com; s.nawrocki@samsung.com
Cc: linux-phy@lists.infradead.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linux-
kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-samsung-
soc@vger.kernel.org; rosa.pila@samsung.com; dev.tailor@samsung.com;
faraz.ata@samsung.com; muhammed.ali@samsung.com;
selvarasu.g@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/6] dt-bindings: phy: samsung,usb3-drd-phy: add
ExynosAutov920 HS phy compatible

On 18/09/2025 20:55, Pritam Manohar Sutar wrote:

quoted

Yes, we have already discussed this and convergence was to use the
conventions which are mentioned in the Data-book. So, I updated the
supply names accordingly.

Please see the below communications for the same.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-phy/83dc9435-5850-425d-b345-52e84ef9262c
@kernel.org/
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-phy/6e1c67d2-9bfa-442a-9d53-8c5970a2a9ef
@kernel.org/

Ah, ok, although next time I might ask the same, since commit msg does not
explain that.

Ok, will update commit message. 
Please confirm the commit message if I updated it as below.  

"dt-bindings: phy: samsung,usb3-drd-phy: add ExynosAutov920 HS phy compatible

Document support for the USB20 phy found on the ExynosAutov920 SoC. The
USB20 phy is functionally identical to that on the Exynos850 SoC, so no
driver changes are needed to support this phy. However, add a dedicated
compatible string for USB20 phy found in this SoC.

This phy needs 0.75v, 0.18v and 3.3v supplies for its internal 
functionally. Power Supply's names are as per phy's User Data-Book.
These names, (dvdd, vdd18 and vdd33), are considered  for 0.75v, 1.8v 
and 3.3v respectively.  
"

I still cannot find constraints for the rest of properties, though.

Sorry I didn't get it completely. Can you please elaborate on the same? 

Let me know if you want me to update the commit message 
and send v9? And retain your RB on patch1 and patch3?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Thank you.

Regards,
Pritam