niedz., 2 paź 2022 o 10:00 Krzysztof Kozlowski
[off-list ref] napisał(a):

On 01/10/2022 17:53, Michał Grzelak wrote:

quoted

Hi Krzysztof,

Thanks for your comments and time spent on reviewing my patch.
All of those improvements will be included in next version.
Also, I would like to know your opinion about one.

quoted

quoted

+
+  marvell,system-controller:
+    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle
+    description: a phandle to the system controller.
+
+patternProperties:
+  '^eth[0-9a-f]*(@.*)?$':

The name should be "(ethernet-)?port", unless anything depends on
particular naming?

What do you think about pattern "^(ethernet-)?eth[0-9a-f]+(@.*)?$"?
It resembles pattern found in net/ethernet-phy.yaml like
properties:$nodename:pattern:"^ethernet-phy(@[a-f0-9]+)?$", while
still passing `dt_binding_check' and `dtbs_check'. It should also
comply with your comment.

Node names like ethernet-eth do not make much sense because they contain
redundant ethernet or eth. AFAIK, all other bindings like that call
these ethernet-ports (or sometimes shorter - ports). Unless this device
is different than all others?

IMO "^(ethernet-)?port@[0-9]+$" for the subnodes' names could be fine
(as long as we don't have to modify the existing .dtsi files) - there
is no dependency in the driver code on that.

Best regards,
Marcin