Re: [PATCH net] net: stmmac: dwmac-spacemit: Fix wrong ctrl register definition

[Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 09:03:21AM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
> Hi Inochi,
> 
> On 6/18/26 08:41, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > There register layout of the phy ctrl register has something wrong,
> > fix it to match the right layout
> > 
> > Fixes: 30f0ba420ed3 ("net: stmmac: Add glue layer for Spacemit K3 SoC")
> > Signed-off-by: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  .../net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-spacemit.c    | 13 ++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-spacemit.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-spacemit.c
> > index 223754cc5c79..6feffaa3ef3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-spacemit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-spacemit.c
> > @@ -18,10 +18,12 @@
> >  #include "stmmac_platform.h"
> >  
> >  /* ctrl register bits */
> > -#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_RGMII		BIT(3)
> > -#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_MII		BIT(4)
> > -#define CTRL_WAKE_IRQ_EN		BIT(9)
> > -#define CTRL_PHY_IRQ_EN			BIT(12)
> > +#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_MODE		GENMASK(4, 3)
> > +#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_RMII		FIELD_PREP(CTRL_PHY_INTF_MODE, 0)
> > +#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_RGMII		FIELD_PREP(CTRL_PHY_INTF_MODE, 1)
> > +#define CTRL_PHY_INTF_MII		FIELD_PREP(CTRL_PHY_INTF_MODE, 3)
> > +#define CTRL_PHY_IRQ_EN			BIT(9)
> > +#define CTRL_WAKE_IRQ_EN		BIT(12)
> 
> Looks like you're fixing 2 things there :
> 
>  -> Wake on Lan probably didn't work before, as the wake irq was apparently wrong.

I guess the vendor firmware and uboot may do something for it, 
but the irq is wrong actually.

>  -> The MII mode selection apparently also changes, but maybe you don't have a
>     MII board around to test this ?
> 

Actually, the only board of the K3 is the pico-itx board, and it only has
a RGMII phy. I even doube the spacemit vendor has not tested the MII phy
well....

> Is it possible you address these issues independently (i.e. split this in 2 patches) ?
> That way, if we ever revert one, we won't re-break the other thing that was broken.
> 
> 

Yes, it is fine for me to split it. I will send it in a few days.

Regards,
Inochi