From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net (relay6-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 425BE28B4F1; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 12:47:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.198 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744721224; cv=none; b=LYUozLV6/mrODf5gP+l/F9Ji09VCzTorFUP67bvflWQpbqyFaQTRGP55bPx3TvuDRgNL2OK/XotGGBb7TK/cfJMXYPCdnzsVcOXDTmZhC/T8UB875MBhVd8NYLAkvUysuCD0XAYU2pWH+VlFZ9cMXwuuNyIlf6ce2GdT1ZWR4Sc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744721224; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5vRosKX5Osw72EvS+mxpqaBtV03BB8wYWXzLNWqTvNU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VscrMf5Z9vcPJLfsdRX8xR3T/IfPYH68qe8JrHNLl0AC1DRdz7qs3ckQXEdliLVBfEm2CygvrlF8ROdjWzEtJQXaYNKzQHTo/TsmXv2FFMUic3UPqY/nYYvfnNA+ntejAJZmU26Tanc3ZMRkmzhc7sD1UlMIJCoS645ztW5ewQ4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b=Pb6tvvc7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.198 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bootlin.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bootlin.com header.i=@bootlin.com header.b="Pb6tvvc7" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 299544397E; Tue, 15 Apr 2025 12:46:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bootlin.com; s=gm1; t=1744721219; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=aOROKFQ2lacCi0F/sGRNvCq/N5utu9L8rxls16miSXo=; b=Pb6tvvc76apWhHbdIEqp/Stcts3c7Sm/V+f6ZLnsfk6BojnBRT3ZEPHzce74zAiG4TniuH cf13yoXltXjAjAuMf/nMIooDISY8kg3lLrKYXVpABFT8hWrAiNUXeGmlQPo2GSjvp7E7s8 nP0BG3XeaMRpAMTv3JjUC11g9nPwDyW+DWQc64GMv/oDLsNq9lvhQdPPKKwNDCLg9295KJ f1opItPe2LX2cVUnrs1U6ILDCrw+XxVkwlNZM2aH6/vzMyahQXRf/rtH4SAlxny+yiheen /F5b1OniD+8tDZbayxWleJlcC4r8MzWx8MlhSXxh6XKSMiey9Wo2XVxnEROBEw== Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 14:46:55 +0200 From: Maxime Chevallier To: Matthias Schiffer Cc: Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Andy Whitcroft , Dwaipayan Ray , Lukas Bulwahn , Joe Perches , Jonathan Corbet , Nishanth Menon , Vignesh Raghavendra , Siddharth Vadapalli , Roger Quadros , Tero Kristo , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux@ew.tq-group.com, Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] checkpatch: check for comment explaining rgmii(|-rxid|-txid) PHY modes Message-ID: <20250415144655.416c31ab@fedora.home> In-Reply-To: References: <16a08c72ec6cf68bbe55b82d6fb2f12879941f16.1744710099.git.matthias.schiffer@ew.tq-group.com> <20250415131548.0ae3b66f@fedora.home> Organization: Bootlin X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.1 (GTK 3.24.43; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-GND-State: clean X-GND-Score: -100 X-GND-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddvvdefheefucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuifetpfffkfdpucggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvnecuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddunecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpeffhffvvefukfgjfhhoofggtgfgsehtjeertdertddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforgigihhmvgcuvehhvghvrghllhhivghruceomhgrgihimhgvrdgthhgvvhgrlhhlihgvrhessghoohhtlhhinhdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepudfgleelvddtffdvkeduieejudeuvedvveffheduhedvueduteehkeehiefgteehnecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucfkphepvdgrtddumegtsgduleemkegugeehmeegledttdemieehieekmedvlegsudemlegvfhehmegvkegtjeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepihhnvghtpedvrgdtudemtggsudelmeekugegheemgeeltddtmeeiheeikeemvdelsgdumeelvghfheemvgektgejpdhhvghlohepfhgvughorhgrrdhhohhmvgdpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmrgigihhmvgdrtghhvghvrghllhhivghrsegsohhothhlihhnrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopedviedprhgtphhtthhopehmrghtthhhihgrshdrshgthhhifhhfvghrsegvfidrthhqqdhgrhhouhhprdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoheprghnughrvgifodhnvghtuggvvhesl hhunhhnrdgthhdprhgtphhtthhopegurghvvghmsegurghvvghmlhhofhhtrdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohepvgguuhhmrgiivghtsehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehkuhgsrgeskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepphgrsggvnhhisehrvgguhhgrthdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehrohgshheskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepkhhriihkodgutheskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhg X-GND-Sasl: maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 13:21:25 +0200 Matthias Schiffer wrote: > On Tue, 2025-04-15 at 13:15 +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 12:18:04 +0200 > > Matthias Schiffer wrote: > > > > > Historially, the RGMII PHY modes specified in Device Trees have been > > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Historically > > > used inconsistently, often referring to the usage of delays on the PHY > > > side rather than describing the board; many drivers still implement this > > > incorrectly. > > > > > > Require a comment in Devices Trees using these modes (usually mentioning > > > that the delay is relalized on the PCB), so we can avoid adding more > > > incorrect uses (or will at least notice which drivers still need to be > > > fixed). > > > > > > Suggested-by: Andrew Lunn > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer > > > --- > > > Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 9 +++++++++ > > > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 11 +++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > > > index abb3ff6820766..8692d3bc155f1 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > > > @@ -513,6 +513,15 @@ Comments > > > > > > See: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20131006222342.GT19510@leaf/ > > > > > > + **UNCOMMENTED_RGMII_MODE** > > > + Historially, the RGMII PHY modes specified in Device Trees have been > > ^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Historically > > > + used inconsistently, often referring to the usage of delays on the PHY > > > + side rather than describing the board. > > > + > > > + PHY modes "rgmii", "rgmii-rxid" and "rgmii-txid" modes require the clock > > > + signal to be delayed on the PCB; this unusual configuration should be > > > + described in a comment. If they are not (meaning that the delay is realized > > > + internally in the MAC or PHY), "rgmii-id" is the correct PHY mode. > > > > > > Commit message > > > -------------- > > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > index 784912f570e9d..57fcbd4b63ede 100755 > > > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > > > @@ -3735,6 +3735,17 @@ sub process { > > > } > > > } > > > > > > +# Check for RGMII phy-mode with delay on PCB > > > + if ($realfile =~ /\.dtsi?$/ && $line =~ /^\+\s*(phy-mode|phy-connection-type)\s*=\s*"/ && > > > + !ctx_has_comment($first_line, $linenr)) { > > > + my $prop = $1; > > > + my $mode = get_quoted_string($line, $rawline); > > > + if ($mode =~ /^"rgmii(?:|-rxid|-txid)"$/) { > > > + CHK("UNCOMMENTED_RGMII_MODE", > > > + "$prop $mode without comment -- delays on the PCB should be described, otherwise use \"rgmii-id\"\n" . $herecurr); > > > + } > > > + } > > > + > > > > My Perl-fu isn't good enough for me to review this properly... I think > > though that Andrew mentioned something along the lines of 'Comment > > should include PCB somewhere', but I don't know if this is easily > > doable with checkpatch though. > > > > Maxime > > I think it can be done using ctx_locate_comment instead of ctx_has_comment, but > I decided against it - requiring to have a comment at all should be sufficient > to make people think about the used mode, and a comment with a bad explanation > would hopefully be caught during review. True, and having looked at other stuff in checkpatch, it looks like there's no other example of rules expecting a specific word in a comment. So besides the typo above, I'm OK with this patch :) Maxime