Re: [PATCH net-next v4 09/11] net: dsa: realtek: migrate user_mii_bus setup to realtek-dsa

[Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 11:49:42PM -0300, Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca wrote:
> Using mii_bus will also prevent an easy way for the driver to query
> those registers (although not used anymore after ds_switch_ops
> .phy_read/write are gone)

Exactly, there is no other remaining call to priv->ops->phy_read() and
priv->ops->phy_write(), so their prototypes can be tailored such that
they need no extra adapter.

> I guess the best approach is to append something that identifies the
> other mdio bus, for example ":user_mii". The result is something like
> this:
> 
> mdio-bus:1d
> mdio-bus:1d:user_mii:00
> mdio-bus:1d:user_mii:01
> ...
> 
> Or, for SMI:
> 
> switch:user_mii:00
> switch:user_mii:01
> ...

This looks good.

> 
> It is good enough for me as these switches have only one MDIO bus.
> 
> We could also bring up some kind of a general suggestion for naming
> user_mii buses. In that case, we should be prepared for multiple mdio
> buses and the mdio node name+@unit (%pOFP) might be appropriate. We
> would get something like this:
> 
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio:00
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio:01
> 
> Or, for SMI:
> 
> switch:mdio:00
> switch:mdio:01
> 
> If there are multiple MDIO buses, it will be mdio@N (not tested).
> 
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio@0:00
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio@0:01
> ...
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio@1:00
> mdio-bus:1d:mdio@1:01
> ...

SJA1110 has 2 MDIO buses and they are named:

	snprintf(bus->id, MII_BUS_ID_SIZE, "%s-base-tx",
		 dev_name(priv->ds->dev));
	snprintf(bus->id, MII_BUS_ID_SIZE, "%s-base-t1",
		 dev_name(priv->ds->dev));

which I think is more descriptive, because in its case, the indices in
"mdio@0" and "mdio@1" are arbitrary numbers.

I don't think we'll find a way to unify the naming convention across the
board. Let's use dev_name(dev) + "-some-driver-specific-qualifier" here,
and hopefully also as a convention from now on.

> I also considered %pOFf but it gives a more verbose device name
> without adding too much useful information:
> 
> !ethernet@10100000!mdio-bus!switch1@29:00
> !ethernet@10100000!mdio-bus!switch1@29:01
> !ethernet@10100000!mdio-bus!switch1@29:02
> 
> And I'm reluctant to add those "!" as they may not play nice with some
> non-ideal scripts reading sysfs. I would, at least, replace them with
> ":" .

I'm also not in love with the exclamation marks that the sysfs code has
to use, to replace the forward slashes that can't be represented in the
filesystem.