Re: [PATCH v6] net: sh_eth: Add support of device tree probe

[Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>]

Hello.

On 15-04-2013 6:17, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:

>>>>> This adds support of device tree probe for Renesas sh-ether driver.

>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>

>>>>> V6: - Add renesas,sh-eth-gigabit, renesas,sh-eth-sh4 and
>>>>> renesas,sh-eth-sh3-sh2 to compatible string.
>>>>> - Remove sh-eth,register-type. This is supplemented by the
>>>>> compatible string.
>>>>> - Use the of_property_read_bool instead of of_find_property.
>>>>> - Add sanity chheck for of_property_read_u32.
>>>>> - Update document.
>>>>> V5: - Rewrite sh_eth_parse_dt().
>>>>> Remove of_device_is_available() and CONFIG_OF from support OF
>>>>> checking function and re-add empty sh_eth_parse_dt().
>>>>> - Add CONFIG_PM to definition of dev_pm_ops.
>>>>> - Add CONFIG_OF to definition of of_device_id.
>>>>> V4: - Remove empty sh_eth_parse_dt().
>>>>> V3: - Remove empty sh_eth_parse_dt().
>>>>> V3: - Removed sentnece of "needs-init" from document.
>>>>> V2: - Removed ether_setup().
>>>>> - Fixed typo from "sh-etn" to "sh-eth".
>>>>> - Removed "needs-init" and sh-eth,endian from definition of DT.
>>>>> - Changed "sh-eth,edmac-endian" instead of "sh-eth,edmac-big-endain"
>>>>> in definition of DT.
>>>>> ---
>> [...]

>>>>> @@ -2391,12 +2451,33 @@ static int sh_eth_drv_probe(struct platform_device
>>>>> *pdev)
>>>>> goto out_release;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (np) {
>>>>> + pd = sh_eth_parse_dt(&pdev->dev, ndev, np);
>>>>> + if (pdev->dev.platform_data && pd) {
>>>>> + struct sh_eth_plat_data *tmp =
>>>>> + pdev->dev.platform_data;
>>>>> + pd->set_mdio_gate = tmp->set_mdio_gate;
>>>>> + pd->needs_init = tmp->needs_init;

>>>> OK, so we can't fully convert this driver to the device tree due to
>>>> procedural platform data.

>>> > I then would advice just using OF_DEV_AUXDATA() in the platform data

>> /sdata/code/.

>>> instead of trying to convert the driver to device tree.

>> Convert the platfrom data, I meant. But I already wrote about that I think.

>>> Yes, I knew about this.

>> But still attempted to document and use the data-only device tree properties
>> (which was pointless in the light of procediral platfrom data)?

> Yes, I added this information to next patch.

    WHich information, I didn't understand?

>>>>> +
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>>>> +static const struct of_device_id sh_eth_match[] = {
>>>>> + { .compatible = "renesas,sh-eth-gigabit", },
>>>>> + { .compatible = "renesas,sh-eth-sh4", },
>>>>> + { .compatible = "renesas,sh-eth-sh3-sh2", },

>>> Therefore, the compatible property of this device becomes <CPU>-sh-eth
>>> or <CPU>-sh-eth-<ETHER TYPE>.

>>> How about this?

>> Sounds better. I think however that the conversion of this driver to device
>> tree shouldn't be done without getting rid of the current #ifdef mess in it
>> (which is still on my agenda). I think that the 'register_type' field should
>> move from the platform data to the 'struct sh_eth_cpu_data' in the process.

> I see. this problem will fix next step, I think.

    No, not at all. If we don't get rid of the #ifdef mess, adding device tree 
support will have to add even more of it.

> Best regards,
>    Nobuhiro

WBR, Sergei