[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yzdcjh4OTI90wWyt@euler>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 14:15:58 -0700
From: Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 12/14] dt-bindings: net: dsa: ocelot: add
ocelot-ext documentation
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 11:26:00PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 05:29:26PM -0700, Colin Foster wrote:
> > ---
> > + - phy-mode = "internal": on ports 0, 1, 2, 3
>
> More PHY interface types are supported. Please document them all.
> It doesn't matter what the driver supports. Drivers and device tree
> blobs should be able to have different lifetimes. A driver which doesn't
> support the SERDES ports should work with a device tree that defines
> them, and a driver that supports the SERDES ports should work with a
> device tree that doesn't.
This will change my patch a little bit then. I didn't undersand this
requirement.
My current device tree has all 8 ethernet ports populated. ocelot_ext
believes "all these port modes are accepted" by way of a fully-populated
vsc7512_port_modes[] array.
As a result, when I'm testing, swp4 through swp7 all enumerate as
devices, though they don't actually function. It isn't until serdes /
phylink / pcs / pll5 come along that they become functional ports.
I doubt this is desired. Though if I'm using the a new macro
OCELOT_PORT_MODE_NONE, felix.c stops after felix_validate_phy_mode.
I think the only thing I can do is to allow felix to ignore invalid phy
modes on some ports (which might be desired) and continue on with the
most it can do. That seems like a potential improvement to the felix
driver...
The other option is to allow the ports to enumerate, but leave them
non-functional. This is how my system currently acts, but as I said, I
bet it would be confusing to any user.
Thoughts?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists