From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Mack Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] net: ethernet: cpsw: add optional third memory region for CONTROL module Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 21:14:32 +0200 Message-ID: <5217B498.9010706@gmail.com> References: <1377283987-20040-1-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <1377283987-20040-3-git-send-email-zonque@gmail.com> <5217B3BE.8020003@cogentembedded.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bcousson@baylibre.com, nsekhar@ti.com, davem@davemloft.net, ujhelyi.m@gmail.com, mugunthanvnm@ti.com, vaibhav.bedia@ti.com, d-gerlach@ti.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org To: Sergei Shtylyov Return-path: Received: from mail-ea0-f175.google.com ([209.85.215.175]:43224 "EHLO mail-ea0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753426Ab3HWTOg (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Aug 2013 15:14:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5217B3BE.8020003@cogentembedded.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 23.08.2013 21:10, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 08/23/2013 10:53 PM, Daniel Mack wrote: > >> At least the AM33xx SoC has a control module register to configure >> details such as the hardware ethernet interface mode. > >> I'm not sure whether all SoCs which feature the cpsw block have such a >> register, so that third memory region is considered optional for now. > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt | 5 ++++- >> drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 5 +++++ >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c >> index fc3263f..4feba2f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c > [...] >> @@ -1989,6 +1990,10 @@ static int cpsw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> goto clean_runtime_disable_ret; >> } >> >> + /* Don't fail hard if the optional control memory region is missing */ >> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 2); >> + priv->gmii_sel_reg = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res); > > Hm, but why now you don't fail if devm_ioremap_resource() fails? Well, because I thought maybe we should just ignore failures of that kind altogether for this optional resource. There will still be a warning in that case. Did you like the old approach better? Daniel