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

[Rob Herring]

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Richard Leitner
<richard.leitner@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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?

These are just minimum assertion and deassertion times. I think that's
clear enough.

> 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?

A patch on top of this.

Rob