On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 1:36 PM Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Nov 7, 2022 at 2:50 PM Sean Anderson [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 11/7/22 15:22, Vladimir Oltean wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 02:10:10PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:06:47PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:

quoted

This adds device link support for PCS devices. Both the recommended
pcs-handle and the deprecated pcsphy-handle properties are supported.
This should provide better probe ordering.

Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <redacted>
---

(no changes since v1)

 drivers/of/property.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

Seems like no dependency on the rest of the series, so I can take this
patch?

Is fw_devlink well-behaved these days, so as to not break (forever defer)
the probing of the device having the pcs-handle, if no driver probed on
the referenced PCS? Because the latter is what will happen if no one
picks up Sean's patches to probe PCS devices in the usual device model
way, I think.

Last time [1], Saravana suggested to move this to the end of the series to
avoid such problems. FWIW, I just tried booting a LS1046A with the
following patches applied

01/11 (compatibles) 05/11 (device) 08/11 (link) 09/11 (consumer)
=================== ============== ============ ================
Y                   N              Y            N
Y                   Y              Y            Y
Y                   Y              Y            N
N                   Y              Y            N
N                   N              Y            N

and all interfaces probed each time. So maybe it is safe to pick
this patch.

Maybe? Just take it with the rest of the series.

Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>

Let's have Vladimir ack this. I'm not sure if it's fully safe yet. I
haven't done the necessary fixes for phy-handle yet, but I don't know
how pcs-handle and pcsphy-handle are used or if none of their uses
will hit the chicken and egg problem that some uses of phy-handle hit.

-Saravana