From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56262C433B4 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:30:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3378261369 for ; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:30:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1345999AbhDMNbE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:31:04 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:48300 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231682AbhDMNbC (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Apr 2021 09:31:02 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lWJ7l-00GTjP-9q; Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:30:37 +0200 Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 15:30:37 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Christian Herber Cc: "Radu-nicolae Pirea (OSS)" , "hkallweit1@gmail.com" , "linux@armlinux.org.uk" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "kuba@kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] phy: nxp-c45: add driver for tja1103 Message-ID: References: <20210409184106.264463-1-radu-nicolae.pirea@oss.nxp.com> <64e44d26f45a4fcfc792073fe195e731e6f7e6d9.camel@oss.nxp.com> <111528aed55593de83a17dc8bd6d762c1c5a3171.camel@oss.nxp.com> <82741edede173f50a5cae54e68cf51f6b8eb3fe3.camel@oss.nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 08:56:30AM +0200, Christian Herber wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On 4/12/2021 6:52 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > > So what you are say is, you don't care if the IP is completely > > different, it all goes in one driver. So lets put this driver into > > nxp-tja11xx.c. And then we avoid all the naming issues. > > > > Andrew > > > > As this seems to be a key question, let me try and shed some more light on > this. > The original series of BASE-T1 PHYs includes TJA110, TJA1101, and TJA1102. > They are covered by the existing driver, which has the unfortunate naming > TJA11xx. Unfortunate, because the use of wildcards is a bit to generous. Yes, that does happen. Naming is difficult. But i really think nxp-c45.c is much worse. It gives no idea at all what it supports. Or in the future, what it does not support, and you actually need nxp-c45-ng.c. Developers are going to look at a board, see a tja1XYZ chip, see the nxp-tja11xx.c and enable it. Does the chip have a big C45 symbol on it? Anything to give the idea it should use the nxp-c45 driver? Maybe we should actually swing the complete opposite direction. Name it npx-tja1103.c. There are lots of drivers which have a specific name, but actually support a lot more devices. The developer sees they have an tja1XYZ, there are two drivers which look about right, and enable them both? Andrew