From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olof Johansson Subject: Re: [BISECTED] v4.5-rc1 phylib regression Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:08:00 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20160125154520.GI22974@ak-desktop.emea.nsn-net.net> <20160126044624.GH3880@lunn.ch> <20160126121435.GK22974@ak-desktop.emea.nsn-net.net> <20160126133417.GI3880@lunn.ch> <20160126175353.GG27473@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Aaro Koskinen , Florian Fainelli , "David S. Miller" , Network Development , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" To: Andrew Lunn Return-path: Received: from mail-yk0-f170.google.com ([209.85.160.170]:32795 "EHLO mail-yk0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932586AbcAZSIB (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2016 13:08:01 -0500 Received: by mail-yk0-f170.google.com with SMTP id k129so210584866yke.0 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2016 10:08:00 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20160126175353.GG27473@lunn.ch> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> I hate to bikeshed, but I'm not sure if "generic-mdio" is too... >> generic? Will someone writing a DT be thinking "well, this is a >> generic mdio PHY, I should set it"? "mdio-device"? >> "generic-nonphy-mdio"? Neither of those seem much better. > > How about 'not-a-phy'? "mdio,not-a-phy" or "mdio,non-phy" will scope it a bit, especially if you expect other generic mdio properties that can do with a namespace. Probably time to add devicetree-discuss. Doing so. -Olof