[PATCHv2 net-next 0/2] net: lan966x: some OF cleanups

[PATCHv2 net-next 0/2] net: lan966x: some OF cleanups

[Rosen Penev]

First commit basically adds NVMEM support and second one removes a lot
of fwnode usage.

v2: change signature of lan966x_probe_port

Rosen Penev (2):
  net: lan966x: use of_get_mac_address
  net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

 .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 43 ++++++++++---------
 .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

-- 
2.51.0

[PATCHv2 net-next 1/2] net: lan966x: use of_get_mac_address

[Rosen Penev]

As lan966x is an OF driver, switching to the OF version allows usage of
NVMEM to override the MAC address of the interface.

Handle EPROBE_DEFER in the case that NVMEM loads after lan966x.

Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
index 7001584f1b7a..8bf28915c030 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
@@ -1083,7 +1083,6 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
 	struct fwnode_handle *ports, *portnp;
 	struct lan966x *lan966x;
-	u8 mac_addr[ETH_ALEN];
 	int err;
 
 	lan966x = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*lan966x), GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -1093,9 +1092,11 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, lan966x);
 	lan966x->dev = &pdev->dev;
 
-	if (!device_get_mac_address(&pdev->dev, mac_addr)) {
-		ether_addr_copy(lan966x->base_mac, mac_addr);
-	} else {
+	err = of_get_mac_address(pdev->dev.of_node, lan966x->base_mac);
+	if (err == -EPROBE_DEFER)
+		return err;
+
+	if (err) {
 		pr_info("MAC addr was not set, use random MAC\n");
 		eth_random_addr(lan966x->base_mac);
 		lan966x->base_mac[5] &= 0xf0;
-- 
2.51.0

[PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

[Rosen Penev]

This is a purely OF driver. There's no need for fwnode to handle any of
this, with the exception being phylik_create. Use of_fwnode_handle for
that.

Signed-off-by: Rosen Penev <rosenp@gmail.com>
---
 .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 34 ++++++++++---------
 .../ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
index 8bf28915c030..98937830e74b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ static int lan966x_port_open(struct net_device *dev)
 		ANA_PORT_CFG_PORTID_VAL,
 		lan966x, ANA_PORT_CFG(port->chip_port));
 
-	err = phylink_fwnode_phy_connect(port->phylink, port->fwnode, 0);
+	err = phylink_of_phy_connect(port->phylink, port->dnode, 0);
 	if (err) {
 		netdev_err(dev, "Could not attach to PHY\n");
 		return err;
@@ -767,8 +767,8 @@ static void lan966x_cleanup_ports(struct lan966x *lan966x)
 			port->phylink = NULL;
 		}
 
-		if (port->fwnode)
-			fwnode_handle_put(port->fwnode);
+		if (port->dnode)
+			of_node_put(port->dnode);
 	}
 
 	disable_irq(lan966x->xtr_irq);
@@ -791,7 +791,7 @@ static void lan966x_cleanup_ports(struct lan966x *lan966x)
 
 static int lan966x_probe_port(struct lan966x *lan966x, u32 p,
 			      phy_interface_t phy_mode,
-			      struct fwnode_handle *portnp)
+			      struct device_node *portnp)
 {
 	struct lan966x_port *port;
 	struct phylink *phylink;
@@ -855,7 +855,7 @@ static int lan966x_probe_port(struct lan966x *lan966x, u32 p,
 		  port->phylink_config.supported_interfaces);
 
 	phylink = phylink_create(&port->phylink_config,
-				 portnp,
+				 of_fwnode_handle(portnp),
 				 phy_mode,
 				 &lan966x_phylink_mac_ops);
 	if (IS_ERR(phylink)) {
@@ -1081,7 +1081,7 @@ static int lan966x_reset_switch(struct lan966x *lan966x)
 
 static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
-	struct fwnode_handle *ports, *portnp;
+	struct device_node *ports, *portnp;
 	struct lan966x *lan966x;
 	int err;
 
@@ -1179,7 +1179,7 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		}
 	}
 
-	ports = device_get_named_child_node(&pdev->dev, "ethernet-ports");
+	ports = of_get_child_by_name(pdev->dev.of_node, "ethernet-ports");
 	if (!ports)
 		return dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, -ENODEV,
 				     "no ethernet-ports child found\n");
@@ -1191,25 +1191,27 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	lan966x_stats_init(lan966x);
 
 	/* go over the child nodes */
-	fwnode_for_each_available_child_node(ports, portnp) {
+	for_each_available_child_of_node(ports, portnp) {
 		phy_interface_t phy_mode;
 		struct phy *serdes;
 		u32 p;
 
-		if (fwnode_property_read_u32(portnp, "reg", &p))
+		if (of_property_read_u32(portnp, "reg", &p))
 			continue;
 
-		phy_mode = fwnode_get_phy_mode(portnp);
+		err = of_get_phy_mode(portnp, &phy_mode);
+		if (err)
+			goto cleanup_ports;
+
 		err = lan966x_probe_port(lan966x, p, phy_mode, portnp);
 		if (err)
 			goto cleanup_ports;
 
 		/* Read needed configuration */
 		lan966x->ports[p]->config.portmode = phy_mode;
-		lan966x->ports[p]->fwnode = fwnode_handle_get(portnp);
+		lan966x->ports[p]->dnode = of_node_get(portnp);
 
-		serdes = devm_of_phy_optional_get(lan966x->dev,
-						  to_of_node(portnp), NULL);
+		serdes = devm_of_phy_optional_get(lan966x->dev, portnp, NULL);
 		if (IS_ERR(serdes)) {
 			err = PTR_ERR(serdes);
 			goto cleanup_ports;
@@ -1222,7 +1224,7 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 			goto cleanup_ports;
 	}
 
-	fwnode_handle_put(ports);
+	of_node_put(ports);
 
 	lan966x_mdb_init(lan966x);
 	err = lan966x_fdb_init(lan966x);
@@ -1255,8 +1257,8 @@ static int lan966x_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	lan966x_fdb_deinit(lan966x);
 
 cleanup_ports:
-	fwnode_handle_put(ports);
-	fwnode_handle_put(portnp);
+	of_node_put(ports);
+	of_node_put(portnp);
 
 	lan966x_cleanup_ports(lan966x);
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h
index 4f75f0688369..bafb8f5ee64d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.h
@@ -407,7 +407,7 @@ struct lan966x_port {
 	struct lan966x_port_config config;
 	struct phylink *phylink;
 	struct phy *serdes;
-	struct fwnode_handle *fwnode;
+	struct device_node *dnode;
 
 	u8 ptp_tx_cmd;
 	bool ptp_rx_cmd;
-- 
2.51.0

Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Mon,  1 Sep 2025 13:20:01 -0700 Rosen Penev wrote:
> This is a purely OF driver. There's no need for fwnode to handle any of
> this, with the exception being phylik_create. Use of_fwnode_handle for
> that.

Not sure this is worth cleaning up, but I'm not an OF API expert.
It's pretty odd that you're sneaking in an extra error check in
such a cleanup patch without even mentioning it.
-- 
pw-bot: cr

Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

[Rosen Penev]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 4:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon,  1 Sep 2025 13:20:01 -0700 Rosen Penev wrote:
> > This is a purely OF driver. There's no need for fwnode to handle any of
> > this, with the exception being phylik_create. Use of_fwnode_handle for
> > that.
>
> Not sure this is worth cleaning up, but I'm not an OF API expert.
> It's pretty odd that you're sneaking in an extra error check in
> such a cleanup patch without even mentioning it.
git grep shows most drivers handling the error.

git grep of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | grep -v = | wc -l
7
git grep \ =\ of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | wc -l
48

I don't see why it should be different here.

Actually without handling the error, phy_mode gets used unassigned in
lan966x_probe_port

The fwnode API is different as it conflates int and phy_connection_t
as the same thing.
> --
> pw-bot: cr

Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

[Daniel Machon]

> On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 4:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon,  1 Sep 2025 13:20:01 -0700 Rosen Penev wrote:
> > > This is a purely OF driver. There's no need for fwnode to handle any of
> > > this, with the exception being phylik_create. Use of_fwnode_handle for
> > > that.
> >
> > Not sure this is worth cleaning up, but I'm not an OF API expert.
> > It's pretty odd that you're sneaking in an extra error check in
> > such a cleanup patch without even mentioning it.
> git grep shows most drivers handling the error.
> 
> git grep of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | grep -v = | wc -l
> 7
> git grep \ =\ of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | wc -l
> 48
> 
> I don't see why it should be different here.
> 
> Actually without handling the error, phy_mode gets used unassigned in
> lan966x_probe_port
> 
> The fwnode API is different as it conflates int and phy_connection_t
> as the same thing.
> > --
> > pw-bot: cr

About the added error check - I agree with Jakub that this deserves to be
mentioned, and should be a patch on its own. 

I did some testing on lan966x, and before the added error check, it was
actually possible to omit phy-mode from the DT, and still have a valid port
configuration - but then again, the bindings documents phy-mode as a required
property.. maybe this should be enforced in the code.

As for the fwnode -> of changes, those looks good to me.

/Daniel

Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 2/2] net: lan966x: convert fwnode to of

[Rosen Penev]

On Thu, Sep 4, 2025 at 2:01 AM Daniel Machon
<daniel.machon@microchip.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 4:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon,  1 Sep 2025 13:20:01 -0700 Rosen Penev wrote:
> > > > This is a purely OF driver. There's no need for fwnode to handle any of
> > > > this, with the exception being phylik_create. Use of_fwnode_handle for
> > > > that.
> > >
> > > Not sure this is worth cleaning up, but I'm not an OF API expert.
> > > It's pretty odd that you're sneaking in an extra error check in
> > > such a cleanup patch without even mentioning it.
> > git grep shows most drivers handling the error.
> >
> > git grep of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | grep -v = | wc -l
> > 7
> > git grep \ =\ of_get_phy_mode drivers/ | wc -l
> > 48
> >
> > I don't see why it should be different here.
> >
> > Actually without handling the error, phy_mode gets used unassigned in
> > lan966x_probe_port
> >
> > The fwnode API is different as it conflates int and phy_connection_t
> > as the same thing.
> > > --
> > > pw-bot: cr
>
> About the added error check - I agree with Jakub that this deserves to be
> mentioned, and should be a patch on its own.
Sounds like a fix for net instead of net-next. Not sure how that would
work as both patches would conflict.
>
> I did some testing on lan966x, and before the added error check, it was
> actually possible to omit phy-mode from the DT, and still have a valid port
> configuration - but then again, the bindings documents phy-mode as a required
> property.. maybe this should be enforced in the code.
Absolutely.
>
> As for the fwnode -> of changes, those looks good to me.
>
> /Daniel
>