Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: KmX75NNjDyn/emP9PnRNfxUNTJ0XfFsyK/gXuH99jTRHR6vhhdbWefy8kkVo459Tv1k4zPhrKN
 wo6X2wZbg3Jw==
IronPort-SDR: 5E9WSosBQzK8iHSRfhgvHNS77AYJPr9JeuheVkp2rui5VZc5TD1HezdqQIvCiEQytM8wCdtTwL
 mA4ztDvplldg==
From:   "Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie" 
        <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@intel.com>
To:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
CC:     "kishon@ti.com" <kishon@ti.com>,
        "robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
        "eswara.kota@linux.intel.com" <eswara.kota@linux.intel.com>,
        "vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@linux.intel.com" 
        <vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@linux.intel.com>,
        "Raja Subramanian, Lakshmi Bai" 
        <lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 2/3] dt-bindings: phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC PHY
 bindings
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v7 2/3] dt-bindings: phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC PHY
 bindings
Thread-Index: AQHWf3dxw/rzA2qt3kKkXMMhVhHoqqlTN6sAgAARTICADDstAA==
Date:   Wed, 9 Sep 2020 00:39:59 +0000
Message-ID: <DM6PR11MB3721B821FA9C985C8C386D38DD260@DM6PR11MB3721.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20200821113747.2912-1-wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@intel.com>
 <20200821113747.2912-3-wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@intel.com>
 <20200831091013.GL2639@vkoul-mobl>
 <DM6PR11MB37210C56315013E4995DE2A3DD2E0@DM6PR11MB3721.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <20200901055135.GY2639@vkoul-mobl>
In-Reply-To: <20200901055135.GY2639@vkoul-mobl>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-reaction: no-action
dlp-version: 11.5.1.3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9ac96cbb-ab0e-45f4-c86f-08d85458e208
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Sep 2020 00:39:59.7937
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: VVOj6jxcixWSzhMgtfepcwrmuKfBO+LU2CPk1acLRgvam9lfTyfO8cEBl1PvjvG+3tzo8gXw3FTsgWRE3CwqTxu7r+Pii9lrXU5UETxwfZ+DXc0h+/F4d+BffNxhdExA
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB4644
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Resend the reply.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 1:52 PM
> To: Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie
> <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@intel.com>
> Cc: kishon@ti.com; robh+dt@kernel.org; Shevchenko, Andriy
> <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>; eswara.kota@linux.intel.com;
> vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@linux.intel.com; Raja Subramanian, Lakshmi
> Bai <lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@intel.com>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] dt-bindings: phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC
> PHY bindings
>=20
> On 01-09-20, 04:58, Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie wrote:
>=20
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
> > > > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause) %YAML 1.2
> > > > +---
> > > > +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/phy/intel,keembay-emmc-
> > > phy.yaml#"
> > > > +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#"
> > > > +
> > > > +title: Intel Keem Bay eMMC PHY bindings
> > >
> > > This seems same as
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/intel,lgm-emmc-phy.yaml,
> why
> > > not add a new compatible in lgm binding, or did I miss a difference?
> >
> > AFAIK, LGM make use of syscon node, whilst KMB does not.
> > And LGM and KMB belongs to different SoC family. So, I prefer them to
> > be in separate file.
> >
> > Having said that, with few changes in wordings in title and
> > description, I think we can make it generic and can be used across few
> products.
>=20
> The bindings seems quite similar. We can have two drivers loaded using tw=
o
> compatible but binding description can be made same

Noted. I can make the change i.e. add Keem Bay compatible string in lgm
binding document and drop Keem Bay binding document.

Rob and Vadivel, is there any objection? If not, I will proceed with v9 in =
the
next one or two days.

>=20
> --
> ~Vinod