Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 05/10] net: dsa: microchip: add DSA support for microchip lan937x

On Sat, 2021-07-31 at 18:04 +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the
content is safe

quoted

+void lan937x_mac_config(struct ksz_device *dev, int port,
+                     phy_interface_t interface)
+{
+     u8 data8;
+
+     lan937x_pread8(dev, port, REG_PORT_XMII_CTRL_1, &data8);
+
+     /* clear MII selection & set it based on interface later */
+     data8 &= ~PORT_MII_SEL_M;
+
+     /* configure MAC based on interface */
+     switch (interface) {
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_MII:
+             lan937x_config_gbit(dev, false, &data8);
+             data8 |= PORT_MII_SEL;
+             break;
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RMII:
+             lan937x_config_gbit(dev, false, &data8);
+             data8 |= PORT_RMII_SEL;
+             break;
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII:
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_ID:
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_TXID:
+     case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_RGMII_RXID:
+             lan937x_config_gbit(dev, true, &data8);
+             data8 |= PORT_RGMII_SEL;
+
+             /* Add RGMII internal delay for cpu port*/
+             if (dsa_is_cpu_port(dev->ds, port)) {

Why only for the CPU port? I would like Andrew/Florian to have a look
here, I guess the assumption is that if the port has a phy-handle, the
RGMII delays should be dealt with by the PHY, but the logic seems to be
"is a CPU port <=> has a phy-handle / isn't a CPU port <=> doesn't have
a phy-handle"? What if it's a fixed-link port connected to a downstream
switch, for which this one is a DSA master?

quoted

Thanks for reviewing the patches. My earlier proposal here was to check if there
is no phydev (dp->slave->phydev) or if PHY is genphy, then apply RGMII delays
assuming delays should be dealt with the phy driver if available. What do you
think of that?