[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHvy4AowJHZNcJB=ZM7h770jcGxPhQ_Pb6y+HU68c4bnWWKY5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 10:23:54 +0200
From: Pieter <vtpieter@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Pieter Van Trappen <pieter.van.trappen@...n.ch>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: dsa: microchip: add KSZ8 change_tag_protocol support
On Friday 16 August 2024 at 09:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On 16/08/2024 08:59, vtpieter@...il.com wrote:
> > From: Pieter Van Trappen <pieter.van.trappen@...n.ch>
> >
> > Add support for changing the KSZ8 switches tag protocol. In fact
> > these devices can only enable or disable the tail tag, so there's
> > really only three supported protocols:
> > - DSA_TAG_PROTO_KSZ8795 for KSZ87xx
> > - DSA_TAG_PROTO_KSZ9893 for KSZ88x3
> > - DSA_TAG_PROTO_NONE
> >
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/dsa-port.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/dsa/dsa-port.yaml
> > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ properties:
> > enum:
> > - dsa
> > - edsa
> > + - none
> > - ocelot
> > - ocelot-8021q
> > - rtl8_4
>
> Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Then please
> run `scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict` and (probably) fix more warnings.
> Some warnings can be ignored, especially from --strict run, but the code
> here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning
> is not clear.
Hi Krzysztof, thanks indeed I forgot to run it after my last modifications.
I am aware that the dt-binding patch should be separate, I just thought
it'd make more sense for this RFC to have these together.
> Anyway, what does "none" mean in terms of protocol? Is there a "none"
> protocol? Or you mean, disable tagging entirely?
Indeed the 'none' protocol is DSA_TAG_PROTO_NONE which means
disable tagging entirely. The concept with advantages and disadvantages
is well described in the paper with link which i part of the commit message.
Cheers, Pieter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists