On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 09:10:14AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 05:18:59PM +0000, Conor Dooley wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Dec 05, 2024 at 01:56:36PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
quoted
Introduce devicetree binding for the Texas Instruments DP83TD510
Ultra Low Power 802.3cg 10Base-T1L Single Pair Ethernet PHY.
Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 35 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..cf13e86a4017
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
+%YAML 1.2
+---
+$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/ti,dp83td510.yaml#
+$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
+
+title: TI DP83TD510 10BaseT1L PHY
+
+maintainers:
+ - Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
+
+description:
+ DP83TD510E Ultra Low Power 802.3cg 10Base-T1L 10M Single Pair Ethernet PHY
+
+allOf:
+ - $ref: ethernet-phy.yaml#
+
+properties:
+ compatible:
+ enum:
+ - ethernet-phy-id2000.0181
There's nothing specific here, can someone remind me why the generic
binding is not enough?
The missing binding was blamed by checkpatch. Haw should I proceed with this
patch?
Does dtbs_check complain when you use it in a dts? What you have here
matches against the pattern ^ethernet-phy-id[a-f0-9]{4}\\.[a-f0-9]{4}$
so I think it won't. checkpatch might be too dumb to evaluate the regex?