[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170728135544.GD32230@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:55:44 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
Cc: robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, wens@...e.org,
linux@...linux.org.uk, peppe.cavallaro@...com,
alexandre.torgue@...com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
icenowy@...c.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net-next: stmmac: support future possible different
internal phy mode
On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 11:28:15AM +0200, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> Hello
>
> The current way to find if the phy is internal is to compare DT phy-mode
> and emac_variant/internal_phy.
> But it will negate a possible future SoC where an external PHY use the
> same phy mode than the internal one.
>
> This patchs series adds a new way to find if the PHY is internal, via its
> compatible.
http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/of/of_mdio.c#L144
Since you also have "ethernet-phy-ieee802.3-c22", you won't get the
warning. But still, your device tree gives the wrong idea.
I've probably asked this before: Does the internal PHY use a different
PHY ID in registers 2 and 3?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists