Re: [net-next RFC PATCH 0/4] net: dsa: Add Airoha AN8855 support

[Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 03:39:26PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 04:36:05PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 03:01:55PM +0200, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > It's conceptually similar to mediatek switch but register and bits
> > > are different.
> > 
> > Is it impractical to use struct regmap_field to abstract those
> > differences away and reuse the mt7530 driver's control flow? What is the
> > relationship between the Airoha and Mediatek IP anyway? The mt7530
> > maintainers should also be consulted w.r.t. whether code sharing is in
> > the common interest (I copied them).
> 
> Some logic are similar for ATU or VLAN handling but then they added bits
> in the middle of the register and moved some in other place.
> 
> Happy of being contradicted but from what I checked adapting the mtk
> code would introduce lots of condition and wrapper and I feel it would
> be actually worse than keeping the 2 codebase alone.
> 
> Would love some help by mt7530 to catch some very common case.

As long as the control flow is reasonably similar, the REG_FIELD() macro
is able to deal with register fields which have moved from one place to
another between hardware variants.