Re: [PATCH 15/16] misc: lan966x_pci: Add dtso nodes in order to support SFPs

[Andrew Lunn]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 04:26:03PM +0200, Herve Codina wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> On Mon, 7 Apr 2025 22:05:31 +0200
> Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 07, 2025 at 04:55:44PM +0200, Herve Codina wrote:
> > > Add device-tree nodes needed to support SFPs.
> > > Those nodes are:
> > >  - the clock controller
> > >  - the i2c controller
> > >  - the i2c mux
> > >  - the SFPs themselves and their related ports in the switch
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 111 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso b/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso
> > > index 94a967b384f3..a2015b46cd44 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso
> > > +++ b/drivers/misc/lan966x_pci.dtso  
> > 
> > What exactly does this DTSO file represent?
> 
> The dsto represents de board connected to the PCI slot and identified
> by its PCI vendor/device IDs.

Then i think the name lan966x_pci.dtso is too generic. It should be
named after whatever microchip calls the RDK.

> We can move the PCI chip in a dtsi included by this dtso but in the
> end this leads to the exact same representation. Further more, moving
> out the PCI chip description in its own dtsi out of this dtso can be
> done in a second step when an other dtso uses the same chip.

And what would you call this pulled out dtsi file? lan966x_pci.dtsi?
That is going to be confusing.

Naming is hard, but we should assume this PCIe device is going to be
successful, and a number of OEMs will build cards around it, so there
needs to be space within the naming scheme for them.

	Andrew