[PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries

[PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries

[Thorsten Scherer]

Even though there is no errata for the KSZ8563 the device shows the same
error as the one fixed in commit 5af53577c64f ("net: dsa: microchip:
KSZ9896 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries").

ksz-switch spi1.0: can't rmw 32bit reg 0x113c: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0: can't rmw 32bit reg 0x1134: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0 lan0 (uninitialized): failed to connect to PHY: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0 lan0 (uninitialized): error -5 setting up PHY for tree 0, switch 0, port 0
ksz-switch spi1.0: can't rmw 32bit reg 0x213c: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0: can't rmw 32bit reg 0x2134: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0 lan1 (uninitialized): failed to connect to PHY: -EIO
ksz-switch spi1.0 lan1 (uninitialized): error -5 setting up PHY for tree 0, switch 0, port 1

So apply the same changes to the ksz8563_valid_regs struct to fix this
issue.

Fixes: 5c844d57aa78 ("net: dsa: microchip: fix writes to phy registers >= 0x10")
Signed-off-by: Thorsten Scherer <t.scherer@eckelmann.de>
---
 drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c | 14 ++++++--------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
index 89f0796894af..25226490d467 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz_common.c
@@ -717,10 +717,9 @@ static const struct regmap_range ksz8563_valid_regs[] = {
 	regmap_reg_range(0x1030, 0x1030),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x1100, 0x1111),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x111a, 0x111d),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x1122, 0x1127),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x112a, 0x112b),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x1136, 0x1139),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x113e, 0x113f),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x1120, 0x112b),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x1134, 0x113b),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x113c, 0x113f),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x1400, 0x1401),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x1403, 0x1403),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x1410, 0x1417),
@@ -747,10 +746,9 @@ static const struct regmap_range ksz8563_valid_regs[] = {
 	regmap_reg_range(0x2030, 0x2030),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x2100, 0x2111),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x211a, 0x211d),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x2122, 0x2127),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x212a, 0x212b),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x2136, 0x2139),
-	regmap_reg_range(0x213e, 0x213f),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x2120, 0x212b),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x2134, 0x213b),
+	regmap_reg_range(0x213c, 0x213f),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x2400, 0x2401),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x2403, 0x2403),
 	regmap_reg_range(0x2410, 0x2417),
-- 
2.39.5

Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Thu,  6 Feb 2025 13:22:45 +0100 Thorsten Scherer wrote:
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x1122, 0x1127),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x112a, 0x112b),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x1136, 0x1139),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x113e, 0x113f),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x1120, 0x112b),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x1134, 0x113b),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x113c, 0x113f),

can these two not be merged?

>  	regmap_reg_range(0x1400, 0x1401),
>  	regmap_reg_range(0x1403, 0x1403),
>  	regmap_reg_range(0x1410, 0x1417),
> @@ -747,10 +746,9 @@ static const struct regmap_range ksz8563_valid_regs[] = {
>  	regmap_reg_range(0x2030, 0x2030),
>  	regmap_reg_range(0x2100, 0x2111),
>  	regmap_reg_range(0x211a, 0x211d),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x2122, 0x2127),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x212a, 0x212b),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x2136, 0x2139),
> -	regmap_reg_range(0x213e, 0x213f),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x2120, 0x212b),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x2134, 0x213b),
> +	regmap_reg_range(0x213c, 0x213f),

and these?
-- 
pw-bot: cr

Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries

[Thorsten Scherer]

Hello,

On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 05:00:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu,  6 Feb 2025 13:22:45 +0100 Thorsten Scherer wrote:
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x1122, 0x1127),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x112a, 0x112b),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x1136, 0x1139),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x113e, 0x113f),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x1120, 0x112b),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x1134, 0x113b),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x113c, 0x113f),
> 
> can these two not be merged?

I am not 100% sure.   But atm I don't see a reason why they could not.

> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x1400, 0x1401),
> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x1403, 0x1403),
> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x1410, 0x1417),
> > @@ -747,10 +746,9 @@ static const struct regmap_range ksz8563_valid_regs[] = {
> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x2030, 0x2030),
> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x2100, 0x2111),
> >  	regmap_reg_range(0x211a, 0x211d),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x2122, 0x2127),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x212a, 0x212b),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x2136, 0x2139),
> > -	regmap_reg_range(0x213e, 0x213f),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x2120, 0x212b),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x2134, 0x213b),
> > +	regmap_reg_range(0x213c, 0x213f),
> 
> and these?

Dito.

Will send a v2 as soon as I can get my hands on the test board again
(next few days).

> -- 
> pw-bot: cr

Best regards
Thorsten

RE: [PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit boundaries

[Tristram.Ha]

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: microchip: KSZ8563 register regmap alignment to 32 bit
> boundaries
> 
> [Some people who received this message don't often get email from
> t.scherer@eckelmann.de. Learn why this is important at
> https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
> 
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content
> is safe
> 
> Hello,
> 
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 05:00:37PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu,  6 Feb 2025 13:22:45 +0100 Thorsten Scherer wrote:
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x1122, 0x1127),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x112a, 0x112b),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x1136, 0x1139),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x113e, 0x113f),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x1120, 0x112b),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x1134, 0x113b),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x113c, 0x113f),
> >
> > can these two not be merged?
> 
> I am not 100% sure.   But atm I don't see a reason why they could not.

When KSZ9896 register mapping was changed I already explained that
0xN100-0xN13F ranges map to PHY registers 0-0x1F, so it is safe to assign
only 2 ranges: regmap_reg_range(0x1100, 0x111f),
regmap_reg_range(0x0x1120, 0x113f).

The formula for accessing PHY register through port register is
0xN100 + reg * 2.

There is a bug in which high range 0xN120-0xN13f write has to be 32-bit.

> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x1400, 0x1401),
> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x1403, 0x1403),
> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x1410, 0x1417),
> > > @@ -747,10 +746,9 @@ static const struct regmap_range ksz8563_valid_regs[] =
> {
> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x2030, 0x2030),
> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x2100, 0x2111),
> > >     regmap_reg_range(0x211a, 0x211d),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x2122, 0x2127),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x212a, 0x212b),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x2136, 0x2139),
> > > -   regmap_reg_range(0x213e, 0x213f),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x2120, 0x212b),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x2134, 0x213b),
> > > +   regmap_reg_range(0x213c, 0x213f),
> >
> > and these?
> 
> Dito.
> 
> Will send a v2 as soon as I can get my hands on the test board again
> (next few days).