From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53245C43334 for ; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 20:40:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236312AbiF3Ukm (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:40:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36450 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231316AbiF3Ukl (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jun 2022 16:40:41 -0400 Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.153.233]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C69B22DB; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:40:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1656621640; x=1688157640; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=dLHwojcIwhnxNiJZmRhvdWkTN7FOsnP5rdFn+0H9dDI=; b=VKHeF8RNBqZIcBwicqtq9t42AcBwiu4mh6kuKKXsu8Ssx/KBYBqFi9dc phuFJjWHNzTgS0RX7eUgJH3D6rPeJkPxlfayDVHjtWFDOfz6MoGJETzsY XnNurJH1j3uNp5ledT8EWNf7opWzkCRr9Q+PRHdG8SZTw5vvsuR6HqdQL u4xcNw7WUE0a5XZvivGM0p7uDCmtaFT11BFiyoMM3QszT5Iw+kE368l0n 76M5dFLW1MebWxd4x7dp4V4LRoDt9i1C7KCcJ1+jg6HswY4fd82DTzPv0 psrbbbVQfX8TQwV/pzTDmtwK8dKGfrxExAh8IFEgw487z6vbXrkgUZ+1d g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,235,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="170590192" Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa3.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA256; 30 Jun 2022 13:40:39 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex01.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.143) by chn-vm-ex03.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.151) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.17; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:40:39 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.115.15) by chn-vm-ex01.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2375.17 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 30 Jun 2022 13:40:39 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 22:44:33 +0200 From: Horatiu Vultur To: Michael Walle CC: "David S . Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] net: lan966x: hardcode port count Message-ID: <20220630204433.hg2a2ws2zk5p73ld@soft-dev3-1.localhost> References: <20220630140237.692986-1-michael@walle.cc> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220630140237.692986-1-michael@walle.cc> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org The 06/30/2022 16:02, Michael Walle wrote: > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe > > Don't rely on the device tree to count the number of physical port. Instead > introduce a new compatible string which the driver can use to select the > correct port count. > > This also hardcodes the generic compatible string to 8. The rationale is > that this compatible string was just used for the LAN9668 for now and I'm > not even sure the current driver would support the LAN9662. It works also on LAN9662, but I didn't have time to send patches for DTs. Then when I send patches for LAN9662, do I need to go in all dts files to change the compatible string for the 'switch' node? > > Michael Walle (4): > net: lan966x: hardcode the number of external ports > dt-bindings: net: lan966x: add specific compatible string > net: lan966x: add new compatible microchip,lan9668-switch > ARM: dts: lan966x: use new microchip,lan9668-switch compatible > > .../net/microchip,lan966x-switch.yaml | 5 +++- > arch/arm/boot/dts/lan966x.dtsi | 2 +- > .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 24 +++++++++++++------ > 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.30.2 > -- /Horatiu