[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231023124642.6519-1-ante.knezic@helmholz.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:46:42 +0200
From: Ante Knezic <ante.knezic@...mholz.de>
To: <olteanv@...il.com>
CC: <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <andrew@...n.ch>,
<ante.knezic@...mholz.de>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <marex@...x.de>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<o.rempel@...gutronix.de>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<woojung.huh@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] net:dsa:microchip: add property to select
On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 15:19:24 +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> I have no doubt that RMII settings are port settings. Scaling up the implementation
> to multiple ports on other switches doesn't mean that the DT binding shouldn't be
> per port.
>
> Anyway, the per-port access to a global switch setting is indeed a common theme
> with the old Micrel switches. I once tried to introduce the concept of "wacky"
> regmap regfields for that:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20230316161250.3286055-3-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/
>
> but I don't have hardware to test and nobody who does picked up upon the regfield
> idea, it seems.
Ok so I see about moving this to port property.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists