From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: zonque@gmail.com (Daniel Mack)
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 10:15:02 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 3/4] net: ethernet: cpsw: add support for hardware
 interface mode config
In-Reply-To: <5216FDBC.3010600@ti.com>
References: <1377171448-27924-1-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com>
 <1377171448-27924-4-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <5216F366.50609@ti.com>
 <5216FDBC.3010600@ti.com>
Message-ID: <52171A06.9040400@gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 23.08.2013 08:14, Mugunthan V N wrote:
> On Friday 23 August 2013 11:00 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>> @@ -728,6 +736,44 @@ static void _cpsw_adjust_link(struct cpsw_slave *slave,
>>>>  	u32			mac_control = 0;
>>>>  	u32			slave_port;
>>>>  
>>>> +	if (priv->gmii_sel_reg && of_machine_is_compatible("ti,am33xx")) {
>> This sounds like the DT version of cpu_is_am335x()! Looks like you need
>> to introduce a new compatible "ti,am3352-cpsw" to indicate the AM3352
>> specific features of the CPSW IP (yeah, control module is not really
>> part of the IP, but by introducing it in the driver, we are treating it
>> such anyway. And you can see this register as extension of IP since its
>> not shared for any other purpose).
>>
> 
> I also agree but it should be ti,am3352-cpsw or ti.am33xx-cpsw?

I think the rule is to be as specific as possible, so I'll take
ti,am3352-cpsw.

Thank you very much for the review, everyone. I'll respin a new series
with all issues addressed.


Daniel