From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jogo@openwrt.org (Jonas Gorski) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 13:48:53 +0200 Subject: Second ethernet on kirkwood does not work when probed through DT In-Reply-To: <51D952D3.8070401@gmail.com> References: <20130706215426.6e666d6af0dc6c9ea5fe32cd@openwrt.org> <51D88A8E.1060104@gmail.com> <20130706233912.00004044@unknown> <51D94884.4000204@gmail.com> <20130707132607.00007188@unknown> <51D952D3.8070401@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130707134853.00003b9d@unknown> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 13:36:51 +0200 Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 07/07/2013 01:26 PM, Jonas Gorski wrote: > > On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 12:52:52 +0200 > > Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >> Anyway, can you please try to have both ports reg properties set > >> to<0>, with nodes named ethernet0-port at 0 and ethernet1-port at 0, > >> and the platform_device_alloc in mv643xx_eth modified? > > > > In addition I added a static counter for the allocated devs (to not > > overwrite the pointers in port_platdev[]). > > Ok, but that is not required to make it work, is it? IMHO we should > honor what is passed by reg property, even it will be always zero > for KW and the other Orion SoCs. Otherwise, we would implicitly put > the numbering in the order of port nodes. No, picking the next free "slot" should work, too - it was just the easiest to fix the name for the alloc to what seems to be expected by other parts. > > That seems to work, as now eth1 comes up and works (successfully got a > > IP through DHCP). > > Ok, great. Will prepare a fix for mv643xx_eth on top of net-next. And > an update of the kirkwood conversion patches. Thanks, Jonas