On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 15:44:16 +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski [off-list ref] said:

On Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:23:16 +0200, Vinod Koul [off-list ref] said:

quoted

On 29-06-26, 16:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

quoted

quoted

Russell King asked me to put the PHY logic for SCMI pm domains into the PHY
driver instead of the MAC driver where it was previously. Instead of cramming
both HLOS and firmware handling into the same driver, I figured it makes more
sense to have a dedicated, cleaner driver as the two share very little code (if
any).

I think you are mixing up DT bindings and driver implementation?

Should the bindings change if we have different driver and firmware
implementations? Isn't binding supposed to be agnostic of
implementations..?

The way sa8255p implements SCMI is with SMC exclusively but - since even base
support is not yet upstream -  maybe it would be possible to expose SCMI clocks
like some platforms do and reuse the same binding.

Would it make sense?

Bart

Scratch that. The firmware on sa8255p does not expose SCMI clock protocol, we
can only use devfs with this PHY so it's either the same binding document with
different properties depending on compatible or two separate bindings. I prefer
the latter because it's cleaner.

Bartosz