Re: [PATCH v6 20/27] misc: lan966x_pci: Fix dtso nodes ordering

Re: [PATCH v6 20/27] misc: lan966x_pci: Fix dtso nodes ordering

[Herve Codina]

Hi Linus,

On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 11:33:19 +0100
Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi Herve,
> 
> this is nitpicking, but if you respin the series consider the following:
> 
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 3:42 PM Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com> wrote:
> >
> > Nodes available in the dtso are not ordered by their unit address.
> >
> > Fix that re-ordering them according to their unit address.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com>  
> (...)
> > +                               switch: switch@e0000000 {  
> 
> Recommended practice is:
> 
> ethernet-switch@...
> 
> > +                                       compatible = "microchip,lan966x-switch";
> > +                                       reg = <0xe0000000 0x0100000>,
> > +                                             <0xe2000000 0x0800000>;
> > +                                       reg-names = "cpu", "gcb";
> > +
> > +                                       interrupt-parent = <&oic>;
> > +                                       interrupts = <12 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > +                                                    <9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > +                                       interrupt-names = "xtr", "ana";
> > +
> > +                                       resets = <&reset 0>;
> > +                                       reset-names = "switch";
> > +
> > +                                       pinctrl-names = "default";
> > +                                       pinctrl-0 = <&tod_pins>;
> > +
> > +                                       ethernet-ports {
> > +                                               #address-cells = <1>;
> > +                                               #size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > +                                               port0: port@0 {  
> 
> Recommended practice is:
> ethernet-port@...
> 

Yes, it should be but the DT binding [0] says "switch" and "port".

Those node names have to follow the DT binding even if this binding doesn't
follow recommended practice.

[0] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.0/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/microchip,lan966x-switch.yaml

Best regards,
Hervé

-- 
Hervé Codina, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Re: [PATCH v6 20/27] misc: lan966x_pci: Fix dtso nodes ordering

[Linus Walleij]

On Thu, May 7, 2026 at 9:23 AM Herve Codina <herve.codina@bootlin.com> wrote:

> > Recommended practice is:
> >
> > ethernet-switch@...
(...)
> > Recommended practice is:
> > ethernet-port@...
>
> Yes, it should be but the DT binding [0] says "switch" and "port".
(...)
> Those node names have to follow the DT binding even if this binding doesn't
> follow recommended practice.

Aha this binding is not referencing the standard ethernet-switch.yaml,
that's why I got confused.

OK let's just fix it then, I sent a patch.

Yours,
Linus Walleij