Fix problems with Holly's DT representation of ethernet PHYs

[Segher Boessenkool]

>>> 	- Second, the PHYs give only "bcm54xx" as a compatible
>>> property.  This is unfortunate, because there are many bcm54xx PHY
>>> models, and they have differences which can matter.  We add a more
>>> precise compatible string, giving the precise PHY model (bcm5461A in
>>> this case).
>>
>> You completely removed the "compatible" properties instead.
>> Bad idea.
>
> Um... weren't you the one that was just saying compatible properties
> aren't necessary if you can distinguish the hardware in other ways?

The OS device driver doesn't need "compatible" if it
can probe the device some other way; it doesn't need
the device node at all, even.  You still should have
a "compatible" property (or, old style, a specific
"name" property) if you want the OS to be able to use
the device node to recognise the device (i.e., if a
device node for the device exists at all: always).


Segher