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:   Wed, 10 May 2023 16:12:08 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc:     Christian Gmeiner <christian.gmeiner@gmail.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Dominic Rath <rath@ibv-augsburg.de>,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, tjoseph@cadence.com,
        bhelgaas@google.com, lpieralisi@kernel.org, nm@ti.com,
        vigneshr@ti.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        bahle@ibv-augsburg.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: phy: cadence-torrent: Add latency
 properties
Message-ID: <ZFwIqBRj8in1CaGB@bhelgaas>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <6a36a4ad-6d46-4e4e-1724-ed27513a72ef@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 09:08:39AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 09/05/2023 23:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 05:31:19PM +0200, Christian Gmeiner wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 07:50:30AM +0200, Dominic Rath wrote:
> >>>> From: Alexander Bahle <bahle@ibv-augsburg.de>
> >>>>
> >>>> Add "tx-phy-latency-ps" and "rx-phy-latency-ps" DT bindings for
> >>>> setting the PCIe PHY latencies.
> >>>> The properties expect a list of uint32 PHY latencies in picoseconds for
> >>>> every supported speed starting at PCIe Gen1, e.g.:
> >>>>
> >>>>   tx-phy-latency-ps = <100000 200000>; /* Gen1: 100ns, Gen2: 200ns */
> >>>>   rx-phy-latency-ps = <150000 250000>; /* Gen1: 150ns, Gen2: 250ns */
> >>>
> >>> Are these things that could/should be described in a more generic
> >>> place?  They don't look necessarily Cadence-specific.
> >>
> >> As there is currently no generic binding, would you like to see a new
> >> yaml binding
> >> added (Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/phy.yaml) that contains just the
> >> two phy properties?
> > 
> > The whole thing is more a question for Rob.
> 
> For which you might wait a bit currently.
> 
> If the question is only about location of the properties - device schema
> or something generic - then for now you can keep it here. Moving to
> generic schema is always easy later.
> 
> Better to have proper names for properties.

Good point.  The current names seem fine to me since the names
themselves aren't Cadence-specific.

Bjorn