Re: [PATCH v6 20/27] misc: lan966x_pci: Fix dtso nodes ordering
From: Herve Codina
Date: Thu May 07 2026 - 03:25:02 EST
Hi Linus,
On Thu, 26 Mar 2026 11:33:19 +0100
Linus Walleij <linusw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Herve,
>
> this is nitpicking, but if you respin the series consider the following:
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 3:42 PM Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Nodes available in the dtso are not ordered by their unit address.
> >
> > Fix that re-ordering them according to their unit address.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> (...)
> > + switch: switch@e0000000 {
>
> Recommended practice is:
>
> ethernet-switch@...
>
> > + compatible = "microchip,lan966x-switch";
> > + reg = <0xe0000000 0x0100000>,
> > + <0xe2000000 0x0800000>;
> > + reg-names = "cpu", "gcb";
> > +
> > + interrupt-parent = <&oic>;
> > + interrupts = <12 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> > + <9 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> > + interrupt-names = "xtr", "ana";
> > +
> > + resets = <&reset 0>;
> > + reset-names = "switch";
> > +
> > + pinctrl-names = "default";
> > + pinctrl-0 = <&tod_pins>;
> > +
> > + ethernet-ports {
> > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > + port0: port@0 {
>
> Recommended practice is:
> ethernet-port@...
>
Yes, it should be but the DT binding [0] says "switch" and "port".
Those node names have to follow the DT binding even if this binding doesn't
follow recommended practice.
[0] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.0/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/microchip,lan966x-switch.yaml
Best regards,
Hervé
--
Hervé Codina, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com