From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko =?ISO-8859-1?Q?St=FCbner?=)
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 00:32:04 +0100
Subject: [RESEND PATCH v1 3/4] net: ethernet: arc: Add support emac for
 RK3036
In-Reply-To: <FFCE9129-357E-4643-A350-9927A5AD5720@gmail.com>
References: <1451287341-16453-1-git-send-email-zhengxing@rock-chips.com>
 <1451287341-16453-4-git-send-email-zhengxing@rock-chips.com>
 <FFCE9129-357E-4643-A350-9927A5AD5720@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <10754282.l0GYzq0NWr@diego>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Am Dienstag, 29. Dezember 2015, 14:59:59 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
> On December 27, 2015 11:22:20 PM PST, Xing Zheng <zhengxing@rock-chips.com> 
wrote:
> >The RK3036's GRFs offset are different with RK3066/RK3188, and need to
> >set
> >mac TX/RX clock before probe emac.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Xing Zheng <zhengxing@rock-chips.com>
> >---
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > };
> > 
> > static const struct of_device_id emac_rockchip_dt_ids[] = {
> >
> >-	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3066-emac", .data =
> >&emac_rockchip_dt_data[0] },
> >-	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3188-emac", .data =
> >&emac_rockchip_dt_data[1] },
> >+	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3036-emac", .data =
> >&emac_rockchip_dt_data[0] },
> >+	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3066-emac", .data =
> >&emac_rockchip_dt_data[1] },
> >+	{ .compatible = "rockchip,rk3188-emac", .data =
> >&emac_rockchip_dt_data[2] },
> >
> > 	{ /* Sentinel */ }
> 
> Food for thought, you might want to use an enum here to index
> emac_rockchip_dt_data which would be less error prone if you add/remove
> entries in this structure.

Or just have the structs separately and not in array-form at all, aka
rk3066_emac_dt_data, rk3036_emac_dt_data.

I don't think the original array really improves anything.