RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 RFC net-next 04/18] net: mvpp2: add PPv23 version definition

quoted

Signed-off-by: Stefan Chulski <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h      | 24 ++++++++++++------

--

quoted

 drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c | 17 +++++++++-----
 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h

b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h
index aec9179..89b3ede 100644

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h

@@ -60,6 +60,9 @@
 /* Top Registers */
 #define MVPP2_MH_REG(port)			(0x5040 + 4 * (port))
 #define MVPP2_DSA_EXTENDED			BIT(5)
+#define MVPP2_VER_ID_REG			0x50b0
+#define MVPP2_VER_PP22				0x10
+#define MVPP2_VER_PP23				0x11

Looking at the Armada 8040 docs, it seems this register exists on
PPv2.1 as well, and holds the value zero there.

I wonder whether we should instead read it's value directly into hw_version,
and test against these values, rather than inventing our own verison enum.

I've also been wondering whether your != MVPP21 comparisons should
instead be >= MVPP22.

Any thoughts?

We cannot access PPv2 register space before enabling clocks(done in mvpp2_probe) , PP21 and PP22/23 have different sets of clocks.
So diff between PP21 and PP22/23 should be stored in device tree(in of_device_id), with MVPP22 and MVPP21 stored as .data
Maybe we can do it differently, but I prefer to make this change not in the Flow Control patch series.
I'm OK with both >= MVPP22 and != MVPP21 options.

Regards,
Stefan.