Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 22 Feb 2022 09:57:03 +0100
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc:     =?iso-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment_L=E9ger?= <clement.leger@bootlin.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>, Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] add support for fwnode in i2c mux system and sfp
Message-ID: <YhSlX01mEpFiRZQR@lunn.ch>
References: <20220221162652.103834-1-clement.leger@bootlin.com>
 <YhQHqDJvahgriDZK@lunn.ch>
 <CAHp75VeHiTo6B=Ppz9Yc6OiC7nb5DViDt_bGifj6Jr=g89zf8Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VeHiTo6B=Ppz9Yc6OiC7nb5DViDt_bGifj6Jr=g89zf8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

> > In the DT world, we avoid snow flakes. Once you define a binding, it
> > is expected every following board will use it. So what i believe you
> > are doing here is defining how i2c muxes are described in APCI.
> 
> Linux kernel has already established description of I2C muxes in ACPI:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/firmware-guide/acpi/i2c-muxes.html
> 
> I'm not sure we want another one.

Agreed. This implementation needs to make use of that. Thanks for
pointing it out. I don't know the ACPI world, are there any other
overlaps with existing ACPI bindings?

	Andrew