Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: iio: adc: adi,axi-adc: tweak example node name

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Mon, 13 May 2024 09:19:06 -0500
Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 04:04:38PM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> > It is always recommended to use generic node names for devicetree nodes.
> > The documentation [1] of the AXI ADC IP core says "The most important
> > part of the core is the Receiver PHY module.", so using phy as the node
> > name seems appropriate.
> > 
> > [1]: https://wiki.analog.com/resources/fpga/docs/axi_adc_ip
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml
> > index e1f450b80db2..9cad4c439045 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/adc/adi,axi-adc.yaml
> > @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ additionalProperties: false
> >  
> >  examples:
> >    - |
> > -    axi-adc@44a00000 {
> > +    phy@44a00000 {  
> 
> phy should be used when there's #phy-cells which is not the case here. 
> 'adc' is somewhat standard. Or maybe it should be tied to 
> #io-backend-cells.
> 
> Until we have something defined as ti what it should be, we should just 
> leave node names alone.
> 
> Rob
> 
Unapplied.