Re: [PATCH net-next v5 1/4] phylib: Add device reset delay support

[Richard Leitner]

Hi Rob,

On 12/15/2017 11:17 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 01:16:57PM +0100, Richard Leitner wrote:
>> From: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Some PHYs need a minimum time after the reset gpio was asserted and/or
>> deasserted. To ensure we meet these timing requirements add two new
>> optional devicetree parameters for the phy: reset-delay-us and
>> reset-post-delay-us.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt | 10 ++++++++++
>>  drivers/net/phy/mdio_device.c                 | 13 +++++++++++--
>>  drivers/of/of_mdio.c                          |  4 ++++
>>  include/linux/mdio.h                          |  2 ++
>>  4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt
>> index c05479f5ac7c..72860ce7f610 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/phy.txt
>> @@ -55,6 +55,12 @@ Optional Properties:
>>  
>>  - reset-gpios: The GPIO phandle and specifier for the PHY reset signal.
>>  
>> +- reset-delay-us: Delay after the reset was asserted in microseconds.
>> +  If this property is missing the delay will be skipped.
>> +
>> +- reset-post-delay-us: Delay after the reset was deasserted in microseconds.
>> +  If this property is missing the delay will be skipped.
> 
> I think these names could be clearer as to exactly what they mean. 
> Looking at existing properties with "reset-delay" there's a mixture of 
> definitions whether it is the assert time or the time after deassert.
> 
> So I'd call these "reset-assert-us" and "reset-deassert-us".

Ok, that would be fine with me, but are you sure that we should omit the
"-delay" term completely?

What would be the best approach to post this change (as the patchset was
already merged to net-next)? A separate patch or a v6 of the complete
patchset?

> 
> Rob
> 

regards;Richard.L