[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Zi1o0SilOZ5gWMlT@builder>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 23:06:25 +0200
From: Ramón Nordin Rodriguez <ramon.nordin.rodriguez@...roamp.se>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Parthiban Veerasooran <Parthiban.Veerasooran@...rochip.com>,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, saeedm@...dia.com,
anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com,
ruanjinjie@...wei.com, steen.hegelund@...rochip.com,
vladimir.oltean@....com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Thorsten.Kummermehr@...rochip.com, Pier.Beruto@...emi.com,
Selvamani.Rajagopal@...emi.com, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com,
benjamin.bigler@...nformulastudent.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 11/12] microchip: lan865x: add driver support
for Microchip's LAN865X MAC-PHY
Ok this tripped me up.
> The device tree binding says:
>
> + compatible:
> + oneOf:
> + - const: microchip,lan8650
> + - items:
> + - const: microchip,lan8651
> + - const: microchip,lan8650
>
> So your DT node should either be:
>
> compatible = "microchip,lan8651", "microchip,lan8650";
>
> or
>
> compatible = "microchip,lan8650"
>
> There is no mention of lan865x in the binding, so this patch is
> clearly wrong.
>
> What do you have in your DT node?
Initially I set compatible = "microchip,lan8650", and did not get the
driver to probe, so I got carried away with adding things that were not
necessary.
I dropped my patch and tested again.
What does work is setting:
compatible = "microchip,lan8651"
- or -
compatible = "microchip,lan8651", "microchip,lan8650"
but just compatible = "lan8650" does not work.
Also I'm getting the output
[ 0.125056] SPI driver lan8650 has no spi_device_id for microchip,lan8651
As Conor pointed out setting the define DRV_NAME to "lan8651" fixes
that.
Setting the define to "lan8650" yet gets the spi module to log the 'no spi_device id..'.
I don't really have an opinion here, but I think there is a risk that
more than one dev might stumble on the same thing as me and expect that
either or should work.
BR
R
Powered by blists - more mailing lists