[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200713.174037.991231492779820841.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 17:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: olteanv@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew@...n.ch, vivien.didelot@...il.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, antoine.tenart@...tlin.com,
alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
alexandru.marginean@....com, claudiu.manoil@....com,
madalin.bucur@....nxp.com, radu-andrei.bulie@....com,
fido_max@...ox.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 00/11] New DSA driver for VSC9953 Seville
switch
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 19:57:00 +0300
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
>
> Looking at the Felix and Ocelot drivers, Maxim asked if it would be
> possible to use them as a base for a new driver for the Seville switch
> inside NXP T1040. Turns out, it is! The result is that the mscc_felix
> driver was extended to probe on Seville.
>
> The biggest challenge seems to be getting register read/write API
> generic enough to cover such wild bitfield variations between hardware
> generations.
>
> Currently, both felix and seville are built under the same kernel config
> option (NET_DSA_MSCC_FELIX). This has both some advantages (no need to
> duplicate the Lynx PCS code from felix_vsc9959.c) and some disadvantages
> (Seville needs to depend on PCI and on ENETC_MDIO). This will be further
> refined as time progresses.
>
> The driver has been completely reviewed. Previous submission was here,
> it wasn't accepted due to a conflict with Mark Brown's tree, very late
> in the release cycle:
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/cover/20200531122640.1375715-1-olteanv@gmail.com/
>
> So this is more of a repost, with the only changes being related to
> rebasing on top of the cleanup I had to do in Ocelot.
Series applied, thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists