From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Dooks Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh_eth: call of_mdiobus_register() to register phys Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 17:39:20 +0000 Message-ID: <53039AC8.1010802@codethink.co.uk> References: <1392650895-1422-1-git-send-email-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> <53023B60.4030201@cogentembedded.com> <53022EE4.50607@codethink.co.uk> <53038C6A.1000600@cogentembedded.com> <530383BB.60102@codethink.co.uk> <5303A26D.9050301@cogentembedded.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, horms+renesas@verge.net.au, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, magnus@opensource.se, linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk To: Sergei Shtylyov Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5303A26D.9050301@cogentembedded.com> Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 18/02/14 18:11, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 02/18/2014 07:00 PM, Ben Dooks wrote: > >>>>>> If the sh_eth device is registered using OF, then the driver > >>>>> Which is not supported yet as my DT patch hasn't been merged. >>>>> This patch seems somewhat premature. > >>>> I've got your OF patches in my local tree to test with, this >>>> is what I found during that testing. > >>> The issue is that I didn't post my v3 patch to netdev due to >>> net-next.git repo being closed at this moment and DaveM not wanting to >>> see any patch targeted to it during this time. I've now posted v4 of my >>> Ether DT patch to netdev. > >> Ok, I will look for these tomorrow. > > No significant changes there... > >>>>>> should call of_mdiobus_register() to register any PHYs connected >>>>>> to the system. > >>>>> That's not necessary (but good to have). > >>>> Well, it is necessary if you then want any PHYS bound to >>>> the device to have their OF information to hand, > >>> Ether DT support worked for me without this fragment, at least. > >> Yes, it just that the PHY is not being linked to the relevant >> OF node. The PHY gets bound, it will not be able to find the >> DT info passed. > > With no DT support in the PHY driver, I don't see how it matters. > Perhaps it has to do with your "init-regs" prop patch though... Yes, or if we add some other properties to the PHY node to say how to initialise the registers, such as if the PHY node had. I am going to look in to adding led initialisers to the PHY node in case people do not like my init-regs patch. -- Ben Dooks http://www.codethink.co.uk/ Senior Engineer Codethink - Providing Genius