Hi Rob,
On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 02:10:33PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 5:28 AM, Baruch Siach <bar...@tkos.co.il> wrote:
> > Add device-tree binding documentation SFP transceivers. Support for SFP
> > transceivers has been recently introduced (drivers/net/phy/sfp.c).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baruch Siach <bar...@tkos.co.il>
> > ---
> >
> > The SFP driver is on net-next.
> >
> > Not sure about the rate-select-gpio property name. The SFP+ standard
> > (not supported yet) uses two signals, RS0 and RS1. RS0 is compatible
> > with the SFP rate select signal, while RS1 controls the Tx rate.
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sff-sfp.txt | 24
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sff-sfp.txt
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sff-sfp.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sff-sfp.txt
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..f0c27bc3925e
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sff-sfp.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> > +Small Form Factor (SFF) Committee Small Form-factor Pluggable (SFP)
> > +Transceiver
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +
> > +- compatible : must be "sff,sfp"
>
> Need to document "sff" vendor prefix.
"sff" stands for Small Form Factor Committee, now under Storage Networking
Industry Association (SNIA). Not really a vendor, but a standards body. Does
that count? I could not find any other example in vendor-prefixes.txt, other
than "linux" which is kind of special.
> Kind of a short name, but I guess it is sufficient. Are there
> revisions of the standard (not SFP+) or more than one form factor (I
> don't recall any)?
I'm not aware of any other revisions.
baruch
--
http://baruch.siach.name/blog/ ~. .~ Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
- bar...@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -
