Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 05/10] net: dsa: microchip: add DSA support for microchip lan937x
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Date: 2021-10-07 20:00:15
Also in:
lkml, netdev
On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 08:41:55PM +0530, Prasanna Vengateshan wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+static int lan937x_mdio_register(struct dsa_switch *ds) +{ + struct device_node *mdio_np; + int ret; + + mdio_np = of_get_child_by_name(ds->dev->of_node, "mdio"); + if (!mdio_np) { + dev_err(ds->dev, "no MDIO bus node\n"); + return -ENODEV; + } + + ds->slave_mii_bus = devm_mdiobus_alloc(ds->dev); + if (!ds->slave_mii_bus) + return -ENOMEM; + + ds->slave_mii_bus->priv = ds->priv; + ds->slave_mii_bus->read = lan937x_sw_mdio_read; + ds->slave_mii_bus->write = lan937x_sw_mdio_write; + ds->slave_mii_bus->name = "lan937x slave smi"; + snprintf(ds->slave_mii_bus->id, MII_BUS_ID_SIZE, "SMI-%d", ds->index); + ds->slave_mii_bus->parent = ds->dev; + ds->slave_mii_bus->phy_mask = ~ds->phys_mii_mask; + + ret = of_mdiobus_register(ds->slave_mii_bus, mdio_np);
Please use devm_of_mdiobus_register if you're going to use devm_mdiobus_alloc, or no devres at all. https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210920214209.1733768-3-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com/
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ if (ret) { + dev_err(ds->dev, "unable to register MDIO bus %s\n", + ds->slave_mii_bus->id); + } + + of_node_put(mdio_np); + + return ret; +} + +static phy_interface_t lan937x_get_interface(struct ksz_device *dev, int port) +{ + phy_interface_t interface; + u8 data8; + int ret; + + if (lan937x_is_internal_phy_port(dev, port)) + return PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA;
Typically we use PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_INTERNAL.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ + /* read interface from REG_PORT_XMII_CTRL_1 register */ + ret = lan937x_pread8(dev, port, REG_PORT_XMII_CTRL_1, &data8); + if (ret < 0) + return PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA; + + switch (data8 & PORT_MII_SEL_M) { + case PORT_RMII_SEL: + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII; + break; + case PORT_RGMII_SEL: + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII; + if (data8 & PORT_RGMII_ID_EG_ENABLE) + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_TXID; + if (data8 & PORT_RGMII_ID_IG_ENABLE) { + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_RXID; + if (data8 & PORT_RGMII_ID_EG_ENABLE) + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_ID; + } + break; + case PORT_MII_SEL: + default: + /* Interface is MII */ + interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII; + break; + } + + return interface; +} + +static void lan937x_config_cpu_port(struct dsa_switch *ds) +{ + struct ksz_device *dev = ds->priv; + struct ksz_port *p; + int i; + + ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt; + + for (i = 0; i < dev->port_cnt; i++) { + if (dsa_is_cpu_port(ds, i) && (dev->cpu_ports & (1 << i))) { + phy_interface_t interface; + + dev->cpu_port = i; + dev->host_mask = (1 << dev->cpu_port); + dev->port_mask |= dev->host_mask; + p = &dev->ports[i]; + + /* Check if the device tree have specific interface + * setting otherwise read & assign from XMII register + * for host port interface + */ + interface = lan937x_get_interface(dev, i);
What does the CPU port have so special that you override it here? Again some compatibility with out-of-tree DT bindings?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ if (!p->interface) + p->interface = interface; + + dev_info(dev->dev, + "Port%d: using phy mode %s\n", + i, + phy_modes(p->interface)); + + /* enable cpu port */ + lan937x_port_setup(dev, i, true); + p->vid_member = dev->port_mask; + } + } + +static u8 lan937x_rgmii_dly_reg_val(int port, u32 val) +{ + u8 reg_val; + + /* force minimum delay if delay is less than min delay */ + if (val && val < 2170) + val = 2170; + + /* maximum delay is 4ns */ + if (val > 4000) + val = 4000;
These bindings are new. Given that you also document their min and max values, why don't you just error out on out-of-range values instead of silently doing what you think is going to be fine?