From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jogo@openwrt.org (Jonas Gorski) Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2013 23:43:41 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] net: mv643xx_eth: fix DT port device name In-Reply-To: <1373229231-8838-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> References: <1373229231-8838-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20130707234341.0000721b@unknown> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, 7 Jul 2013 22:33:51 +0200 Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > Device tree support added to Marvell MV643xx ethernet driver registers > port devices from port device nodes found on the corresponding controller > node. The current port device name will cause the second controller to > fail on registration because of two identical device names. This fixes > the issue by taking the device node's name also as port device name. > > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth > Reported-by: Jonas Gorski > --- > Cc: Lennert Buytenhek > Cc: Jonas Gorski > Cc: netdev at vger.kernel.org > Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > Cc: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c > index 6495bea..1f3a03d 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mv643xx_eth.c > @@ -2521,7 +2521,7 @@ static int mv643xx_eth_shared_of_add_port(struct platform_device *pdev, > of_property_read_u32(pnp, "duplex", &ppd.duplex); > } > > - ppdev = platform_device_alloc(MV643XX_ETH_NAME, ppd.port_number); > + ppdev = platform_device_alloc(pnp->name, ppd.port_number); > if (!ppdev) > return -ENOMEM; > ppdev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); This breaks ethernet completely, as there is no platform driver registered for pnp->name ("ethernetX-port"), only for MV643XX_ETH_NAME. Also since I didn't see a patch for it and no mentioning of it: There's still one further issue from having two ethernet-ports with port_number 0, it causes a device leak: static struct platform_device *port_platdev[3]; mv643xx_eth_shared_of_add_port() { ... port_platdev[ppd.port_number] = ppdev; ... } The second port at 0 will overwrite the first and thus will never be deleted in mv643xx_eth_shared_of_remove() { ... for (n = 0; n < 3; n++) { platform_device_del(port_platdev[n]); port_platdev[n] = NULL; } } I doubt a insmod-rmmod-insmod will go well in that case ;-) Regards Jonas