[PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support

[PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support

[Nate Case]

This Broadcom PHY is similar to other bcm54xx devices.

Signed-off-by: Nate Case <ncase@xes-inc.com>
---
 drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c b/drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c
index 29666c8..5b80358 100644
--- a/drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c
+++ b/drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c
@@ -141,6 +141,20 @@ static struct phy_driver bcm5461_driver = {
 	.driver 	= { .owner = THIS_MODULE },
 };
 
+static struct phy_driver bcm5482_driver = {
+    .phy_id		= 0x0143bcb0,
+	.phy_id_mask	= 0xfffffff0,
+	.name		= "Broadcom BCM5482",
+	.features	= PHY_GBIT_FEATURES,
+	.flags		= PHY_HAS_MAGICANEG | PHY_HAS_INTERRUPT,
+	.config_init	= bcm54xx_config_init,
+	.config_aneg	= genphy_config_aneg,
+	.read_status	= genphy_read_status,
+	.ack_interrupt	= bcm54xx_ack_interrupt,
+	.config_intr	= bcm54xx_config_intr,
+	.driver 	= { .owner = THIS_MODULE },
+};
+
 static int __init broadcom_init(void)
 {
 	int ret;
@@ -154,8 +168,13 @@ static int __init broadcom_init(void)
 	ret = phy_driver_register(&bcm5461_driver);
 	if (ret)
 		goto out_5461;
+	ret = phy_driver_register(&bcm5482_driver);
+	if (ret)
+		goto out_5482;
 	return ret;
 
+out_5482:
+	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5461_driver);
 out_5461:
 	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5421_driver);
 out_5421:
@@ -166,6 +185,7 @@ out_5411:
 
 static void __exit broadcom_exit(void)
 {
+	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5482_driver);
 	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5461_driver);
 	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5421_driver);
 	phy_driver_unregister(&bcm5411_driver);
-- 
1.5.3.3

Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Nate Case wrote:

> +static struct phy_driver bcm5482_driver = {
> +    .phy_id		= 0x0143bcb0,
> +	.phy_id_mask	= 0xfffffff0,

 Please check formatting above and also I am a bit curious as to why the 
ID is so different from the other ones -- the number is meant to be based 
on the OUI assigned to the manufacturer.  Otherwise your addition is fine.

  Maciej

Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support

[Nate Case]

On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:51 +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > +static struct phy_driver bcm5482_driver = {
> > +    .phy_id		= 0x0143bcb0,
> > +	.phy_id_mask	= 0xfffffff0,
> 
>  Please check formatting above and also I am a bit curious as to why the 
> ID is so different from the other ones -- the number is meant to be based 
> on the OUI assigned to the manufacturer.  Otherwise your addition is fine.

I'll re-submit with the formatting fixed.

I can't figure out why the ID is so different from the others, but I did
double-check it and test it on real hardware.

For what it's worth, I've found a lot of inconsistency in these ID
values. For example, the chips with ID1 == 0x0020 seem to use the wrong
set of OUI bits (22:7 instead of 21:6), while others (BCM5221) with ID1
== 0x0040 do it properly conforming to the IEEE standard.

I can't figure out how they got the ID values for the BCM5482.  If you
extract the OUI from 0x0143bcb0, you get 0x0050ef (which the *BSD guys
list as an alternate "mangled" Broadcom OUI).  The BCM5787 and BCM5755
also seem to share this same ID formula with the BCM5482.

- Nate Case <ncase@xes-inc.com>

Re: [PATCH] PHYLIB: Add BCM5482 PHY support

[Jeff Garzik]

Nate Case wrote:
> This Broadcom PHY is similar to other bcm54xx devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nate Case <ncase@xes-inc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/phy/broadcom.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

applied