Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: mt7622: fix switch probe on bananapi-r64

["Arınç ÜNAL" <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>]

On 01/07/2024 11:04, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 01.07.24 09:44, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>> On 01/07/2024 09:16, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>> [CCing the other net maintainers]
>>>
>>> On 25.06.24 10:51, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>> Il 25/06/24 07:56, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) ha
>>>> scritto:
>>>>> On 17.06.24 13:08, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>>>>> On 17/06/2024 11:33, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>> It looks more and more like we are stuck here (or was there progress
>>>>> and
>>>>> I just missed it?) while the 6.10 final is slowly getting closer.
>>>>> Hence:
>>>>>
>>>>> AngeloGioacchino, should we ask the net maintainers to revert
>>>>> 868ff5f4944aa9 ("net: dsa: mt7530-mdio: read PHY address of switch from
>>>>> device tree") for now to resolve this regression? Reminder, there is
>>>>> nothing wrong with that commit per se afaik, it just exposes a problem
>>>>> that needs to be fixed first before it can be reapplied.
>>>>
>>>> To be clear on this: I asked for the commit to be fixed such that it
>>>> guarantees
>>>> backwards compatibility with older device trees.
>>>>
>>>> If no fix comes,
>>>
>>> I haven't see any since that mail, did you? If not, I think...
>>>
>>>> then I guess that we should ask them to revert this commit
>>>> until a fix is available.
>>>
>>> ...it's time to ask them for the revert to resolve this for -rc7 (and
>>> avoid a last minute revert), or what do you think?
>>
>> This is quite frustrating. I absolutely won't consent to a revert. [...]
> 
> Reminder: try to not see a revert as a bad thing. It's just means "not
> ready yet, revert and we'll try again later" -- that's actually
> something Linus wrote just a few hours ago:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHk-=wgQMOscLeeA3QXOs97xOz_CTxdqJjpC20tJ-7bUdHWtSA@mail.gmail.com/

Except it is ready and trying again is my responsibility, which means
unnecessary work for me to do. I've already got a ton of things to do.
Applying the device tree patch resolves this regression; no reverts needed.
And then there's the patch in the works by Daniel that will address all the
remaining cases outside of the reported regression.

Arınç