Re: [RFC PATCH] dt-binding: net: sfp binding documentation

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Baruch Siach [off-list ref] wrote:

Hi Russell,

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:53:17PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 01:28:06PM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:

quoted

Add device-tree binding documentation SFP transceivers. Support for SFP
transceivers has been recently introduced (drivers/net/phy/sfp.c).

Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <redacted>
---

The SFP driver is on net-next.

Not sure about the rate-select-gpio property name. The SFP+ standard
(not supported yet) uses two signals, RS0 and RS1. RS0 is compatible
with the SFP rate select signal, while RS1 controls the Tx rate.

SFP+ is usable with this, but the platforms I have do not wire the
rate select pins on the SFP+ sockets to GPIOs, but hard-wire them.

So maybe naming this signal 'rate-select0-gpio' would make it more future
(SPF+) proof? Or 'rate-select-rx-gpio'?

Just extend it by making it an array of 2 gpios.

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 02:12:42PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Baruch Siach [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi Russell,

On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 01:53:17PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

quoted

On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 01:28:06PM +0300, Baruch Siach wrote:

quoted

Add device-tree binding documentation SFP transceivers. Support for SFP
transceivers has been recently introduced (drivers/net/phy/sfp.c).

Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>
---

The SFP driver is on net-next.

Not sure about the rate-select-gpio property name. The SFP+ standard
(not supported yet) uses two signals, RS0 and RS1. RS0 is compatible
with the SFP rate select signal, while RS1 controls the Tx rate.

SFP+ is usable with this, but the platforms I have do not wire the
rate select pins on the SFP+ sockets to GPIOs, but hard-wire them.

So maybe naming this signal 'rate-select0-gpio' would make it more future
(SPF+) proof? Or 'rate-select-rx-gpio'?

Just extend it by making it an array of 2 gpios.

What do you do if you have only one rate select wired up and it doesn't
correspond with the first?

-- 
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 8.8Mbps down 630kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 8.21Mbps down 510kbps up