[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y2pbc90XD5IvZZC0@lunn.ch>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 14:36:51 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Lukasz Majewski <lukma@...x.de>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Matthias Schiffer <matthias.schiffer@...tq-group.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: implement get_phy_address
> Would it be possible to do like armada-3720-turris-mox.dts does, and put
> the phy-handle in the device tree, avoiding the need for so many PHY
> address translation quirks?
>
> If you're going to have U-Boot support for this switch as well, the
> phy-handle mechanism is the only thing that U-Boot supports, so device
> trees written in this way will work for both (and can be passed by
> U-Boot to Linux):
This is how i expect any board using the MV88E6141 and MV88E6341 work.
It has the same issue that it is not a 1:1 mapping.
Portability with U-boot is an interesting argument. Maybe there are
patches to u-boot to add the same sort of quirks?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists