Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] phy: qcom-qmp: Utilize fully-specified DT registers

[Vivek Gautam]

On 2018-10-25 02:06, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 11:29 AM Vivek Gautam
> <vivek.gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Thanks for the patch.
> > I am starting to think that the driver is heavily relying on the
> > resource indices to request
> > all these areas ioremapped. Is it a good way forward that driver and 
> > the
> > dt bindings are
> > chained together?
> > Should we rather switch to requesting these resources by some names?
> >
> > Rob can comment on this possibly.
>
> I thought about suggesting that but I know that Rob really doesn't
> like accessing register ranges by name [1].  Even in cases where you
> reference things by name Rob likes there to be a fully defined order
> and once you have a fully defined order you don't really need the
> names unless you have more than one optional register range.

Right, I second that. I was looking for options. :)

> In any case, Rob already gave his review to Evan's bindings change.  
> See:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20181023002903.GA16854@bogus

Yea, I saw that too.

Best regards
Vivek

> ...so my vote would be to keep it as Evan's patch series has it and
> not try to bikeshed it.
>
>
> > Reviewed-by: Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for the review!
>
>
> [1]
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAL_Jsq+MMunmVWqeW9v2RyzsMKP+=kMzeTHNMG4JDHM7Fy0HBg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> -Doug