[PATCH v4 phy 01/16] dt-bindings: phy: lynx-28g: permit lane OF PHY providers

[Vinod Koul]

On 10-11-25, 11:22, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Josua Mayer requested to have OF nodes for each lane, so that he
> (and other board developers) can further describe electrical parameters
> individually.
> 
> For this use case, we need a container node to apply the already
> existing Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/transmit-amplitude.yaml,
> plus whatever other schemas might get standardized for TX equalization
> parameters, polarity inversion etc.
> 
> When lane OF nodes exist, these are also PHY providers ("phys" phandles
> can point directly to them). Compare that to the existing binding, where
> the PHY provider is the top-level SerDes node, and the second cell in
> the "phys" phandle specifies the lane index.
> 
> The new binding format overlaps over the old one without interfering,
> but there is a caveat:
> 
> Existing device trees, which already have "phys = <&serdes1 0>" cannot
> be converted to "phys = <&serdes_1_lane_a>", because in doing so, we
> would break compatibility with old kernels which don't understand how to
> translate the latter phandle to a PHY.
> 
> The transition to the new phandle format can be performed only after a
> reasonable amount of time has elapsed after this schema change and the
> corresponding driver change have been backported to stable kernels.
> 
> However, the aforementioned transition is not strictly necessary, and
> the "hybrid" description (where individual lanes have their own OF node,
> but are not pointed to by the "phys" phandle) can remain for an
> indefinite amount of time, even if a little inelegant.
> 
> For newly introduced device trees, where there are no compatibility
> concerns with old kernels to speak of, it is strongly recommended to use
> the "phys = <&serdes_1_lane_a>" format. The same holds for phandles
> towards lanes of LX2160A SerDes #3, which at the time of writing is not
> yet described in fsl-lx2160a.dtsi, so there is no legacy to maintain.
> 
> To avoid the strange situation where we have a "phy" (SerDes node) ->
> "phy" (lane node) hierarchy, let's rename the expected name of the
> top-level node to "serdes", and update the example too. This has a
> theoretical chance of causing regressions if bootloaders search for
> hardcoded paths rather than using aliases, but to the best of my
> knowledge, for LX2160A/LX2162A this is not the case.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/02270f62-9334-400c-b7b9-7e6a44dbbfc9@solid-run.com/
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt at kernel.org>
> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt at kernel.org>
> Cc: devicetree at vger.kernel.org
> Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org

You can keep cc lines after s-o-b line after the '---' separator, that
way it will be skipped when applying while email client will cc folks.

My main question was cc stable, for a binding additions, that might not
be helpful as dts may not have these updates, so why port bindings?

-- 
~Vinod