On 31/10/2024 18:16, Jan Petrous wrote:

On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 04:44:45PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On 31/10/2024 15:43, Jan Petrous wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 08:13:40AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 09:24:56PM +0100, Jan Petrous (OSS) wrote:

quoted

+	plat->init = s32_gmac_init;
+	plat->exit = s32_gmac_exit;
+	plat->fix_mac_speed = s32_fix_mac_speed;
+
+	plat->bsp_priv = gmac;
+
+	return stmmac_pltfr_probe(pdev, plat, &res);
+}
+
+static const struct of_device_id s32_dwmac_match[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "nxp,s32g2-dwmac" },
+	{ .compatible = "nxp,s32g3-dwmac" },
+	{ .compatible = "nxp,s32r-dwmac" },

Why do you need three same entries?

We have three different SoCs and in v3 review you told me
to return all back:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/26067257/

It was about binding, not driver.

I also asked there: use proper fallback and compatibility. Both comments
of course affect your driver, but why choosing only first part?

Does it mean I should remove first two (G2/G3) members from match array
and use "nxp,s32r-dwmac" as fallback for G2/G3? And similarly change
the bindings to:

  compatible:
    oneOf:
      - const: nxp,s32r-dwmac
      - items:
	  - enum:
	      - nxp,s32g2-dwmac
	      - nxp,s32g3-dwmac
          - const: nxp,s32r-dwmac

And add here, into the driver, those members back when some device
specific feature will be needed? Am I understand your hints right?

Yes, assuming devices are compatible, but so far driver suggested they are.

Best regards,
Krzysztof