Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] net: lan966x: hardcode port count

[Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>]

The 06/30/2022 22:56, Michael Walle wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> Am 2022-06-30 22:44, schrieb Horatiu Vultur:
> > 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?
> 
> I'd assume there is one lan9662.dtsi and yes, there should then be
>   compatible = "microchip,lan9662-switch";
> or
>   compatible = "microchip,lan9662-switch", "microchip,lan966x-switch";
> depending on the outcome of the question Krzysztof raised.
> 
> And of course adding the compatible string to the driver with a port
> count of 4 (?). I can't find anything about the lan9662,

I am not sure why they have not upload yet the datasheet for lan9662.

>and you've > mentioned it has 4 ports.  Are there four external ports? 

You can have up to 4 ports.
You can have 4 external ports or you can use the internal ones plus two
external.

> I was  under the impression the last digit of the SoC name stands for the
> number of ports.

That would make much more sense but I don't understand why they have
name it like this.

> 
> -michael

-- 
/Horatiu