Re: RFC: Advice on adding support for Qualcomm IPQ9574 SoC Ethernet

[Kiran Kumar C . S . K]

On 10/6/2024 12:00 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 07:47:15PM GMT, Kiran Kumar C.S.K wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/4/2024 12:50 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 11:20:03PM +0530, Kiran Kumar C.S.K wrote:
>>>> On 10/3/2024 2:58 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 02:07:10AM +0530, Kiran Kumar C.S.K wrote:
> [..]
>>> The only remaining dependency I was expecting is the qcom tree depending
>>> on the clock and netdev trees to have picked up the bindings, and for
>>> new bindings I do accept dts changes in the same cycle (I validate dts
>>> against bindings in linux-next).
>>>
>>
>> The only compile-time dependency from PCS driver to NSS CC driver is
>> with the example section in PCS driver's dtbindings file. The PCS DTS
>> node example definitions include a header file exported by the NSS CC
>> driver, to access certain macros for referring to the MII Rx/Tx clocks.
>> So, although there is no dependency in the driver code, a successful
>> dtbindings check will require the NSS CC driver to be available. Could
>> you suggest how such dependencies can be worked around? Would it be
>> acceptable to defer enabling the example node for dtbindings compilation
>> using its 'status' property, until the NSS CC driver is merged?
>>
> 
> You can avoid this dependency by making the example...an example.
> 
> By using just descriptive phandles you can present an example of the
> client device without creating a dependency on the specific provider.
> 

Sure, will represent this as a descriptive phandle and nothing more. Thanks.

> Regards,
> Bjorn