Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: net: dsa: Add SoC-e switch IP and DSA bindings

On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 02:40:53PM +0200, Vasilij Strassheim wrote:

On Mon, 2026-08-03 at 18:43 +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+  compatible:
+    const: soce,switch-dsa

Way too generic. I understand that SoCe will NEVER - and you certify
that - develop a second, different "switch-dsa" model and they call this
one like this?

It is intentionally generic to cover the common basics of all variants and
configurations of the synthesized switch in DSA.
I'm not sure what kind of guarantee I'm supposed to provide here regarding
SoCe. If switch-dsa is already mainline in the future, then a different
compatible will be needed for incompatible new models.

If it is not compatible, it needs a different compatible.

It gets interesting with something you synthesizer, something where
there are a number of different synthesise options. How do you define
compatible? You might want a very specific compatible, for your
synthesise configuration, and a more generic compatible which might
work for other synthesise configurations, but maybe not?

Yes, that's not really satisfying.

That is the problem with FPGAs and jellyware.

I will tweak the driver so that it reads as much as possible from
registers. Currently, I'm considering adopting SoC-e IP Core families as
the compatible option.

I would probably make that the fallback.

Maybe look around at how IP licensed from Synopsys and other vendors
of IP cores work. It is slightly different use case in that these are
generally integrated into silicon, so are fixed, but the chip vendor
often puts logic around the licensed core which needs driving, and
they sometimes integrate the core wrongly, so need workarounds. So you
often have a compatible for the specific vendors overall integration,
and a fallback compatible for the IP core version.

I would suggest something similar here, compatibles for each SoC-e IP
core version, plus a compatible for your specific device.

     Andrew