Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm: dts: mt7623: add gmacs to mt7623.dtsi

[Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>]

On 25/01/2023 17:52, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> On 25.01.2023 19:45, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
>> Am 20. Januar 2023 21:53:14 MEZ schrieb "Arınç ÜNAL" <arinc.unal@arinc9.com>:
>>
>>> index 25d31e40a553..5eb698a90d34 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
>>> @@ -981,6 +981,20 @@ eth: ethernet@1b100000 {
>>>         #address-cells = <1>;
>>>         #size-cells = <0>;
>>>         status = "disabled";
>>> +
>>> +        gmac0: mac@0 {
>>> +            compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
>>> +            reg = <0>;
>>> +            phy-mode = "trgmii";
>>> +            status = "disabled";
>>> +        };
>>> +
>>> +        gmac1: mac@1 {
>>> +            compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
>>> +            reg = <1>;
>>> +            phy-mode = "rgmii";
>>> +            status = "disabled";
>>> +        };
>>>     };
>>>
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts 
>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
>>> index 5008115d2494..a5800a524302 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
>>> @@ -175,9 +175,7 @@ &eth {
>>>     status = "okay";
>>>
>>>     gmac0: mac@0 {
>>
>> Should node not be accessed with label (&gmac0) instead of defining it again 
>> and shadow the one from dtsi?
> 
> I think that's up to preference. I kept it the current way as it's cleaner than 
> taking it out of &eth.
> 

I'd prefer to do use the label, so that we stay consistent in the source tree.
I'll remove the whole series for now. Please provide a v2.

Thanks,
Matthias