[RFC PATCHv2 0/4] Add DT support for fixed PHYs

Hello Thomas,

Le vendredi 6 septembre 2013 17:18:17 Thomas Petazzoni a ?crit :

Hello,

Here is a second version of the patch set that adds a Device Tree
binding and the related code to support fixed PHYs. Marked as RFC,
this patch set is obviously not intended for merging in 3.12.

Thanks a lot for continuing on this work, I really like the state of it now.

Since the first version, the changes have been:

 * Instead of using a 'fixed-link' property inside the Ethernet device
   DT node, with a fairly cryptic succession of integer values, we now
   use a PHY subnode under the Ethernet device DT node, with explicit
   properties to configure the duplex, speed, pause and other PHY
   properties.

 * The PHY address is automatically allocated by the kernel and no
   longer visible in the Device Tree binding.

 * The PHY device is created directly when the network driver calls
   of_phy_connect_fixed_link(), and associated to the PHY DT node,
   which allows the existing of_phy_connect() function to work,
   without the need to use the deprecated of_phy_connect_fixed_link().

The things I am not entirely happy with yet are:

 * The PHY ID is hardcoded to 0xdeadbeef. Ideally, it should be a
   properly reserved vendor/device identifier, but it isn't clear how
   to get one allocated for this purpose.

Right, we should try to get something better, but we obviously cannot use an 
already allocated OUI for this. Can we ask the Linux foundation or a Linux-
friendly company to allocate one maybe?

 * The fixed_phy_register() function in drivers/net/phy/fixed.c has
   some OF references. So ideally, I would have preferred to put this
   code in drivers/of/of_mdio.c, but to call get_phy_device(), we need
   a reference to the mii_bus structure that represents the fixed MDIO
   bus.

This is not a big deal, not everything in drivers/ is consistent with this, 
and making the fixed MDIO bus globally accessible does not sound too great.

 * There is some error management missing in fixed_phy_register(), but
   it can certainly be added easily. This RFC is meant to sort out the
   general idea.

Do you think you could add these to got beyond the RFC state? The patchset as 
it currently is fine with me if you can address these.
-- 
Florian