From: Fuzzey, Martin <martin.fuzzey@flowbird.group> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 
2020 6:16 PM
> >  - gpr: phandle of SoC general purpose register mode. Required for
> > wake on LAN
> > -  on some SoCs
> > +  on some SoCs. Register bits of stop mode control, the format is
> > +       <&gpr req_gpr req_bit>.
> > +        gpr is the phandle to general purpose register node.
> > +        req_gpr is the gpr register offset for ENET stop request.
> > +        req_bit is the gpr bit offset for ENET stop request.
> >
> 
> More of a DT binding changes policy question, do we care about supporting
> the old no argument binding too?
> 
> I don't think it actually matters seeing as the no argument gpr node binding
> was only added recently anyway.
> But it was backported to the stable trees and Documentation/bindings/ABI.txt
> says
> 
>    "Bindings can be augmented, but the driver shouldn't break when given
>      the old binding. ie. add additional properties, but don't change the
>      meaning of an existing property. For drivers, default to the original
>      behaviour when a newly added property is missing."
> 
> Myself I think this is overkill in this case and am fine with just changing 
> the
> binding without the driver handling the old case but that's Rob's call to 
> make I
> think.

The patch set is to add argument binding, and driver also doesn't support wol
without argument binding.

As you know, current driver only wol feature requests the property.
I am not understand why we need to support the old without argument binding.

Welcome to your suggestion for the solution.

And 'gpr' string is not good description for stop mode, I will change it to the 
string:
' fsl,stop-mode'.

Reply via email to