Re: 回覆: [PATCH net-next v2 1/6] dt-bindings: net: ftgmac100: Add AST2700 compatible

[Conor Dooley]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 05:23:21AM +0000, Jacky Chou wrote:
> Hi Conor,
> 
> Thank you for your reply.
> 
> > > dt-bindings: net: ftgmac100: Add AST2700 compatible
> > >
> > > This adds aspeed,ast2700-mac to the FTGMAC100 compatible list, which
> > > requires the faraday,ftgmac100 fallback. It also updates the RMII RCLK
> > > clock description to include AST2700, and allows the resets property
> > > for
> > > AST2700 in the same way as for AST2600.
> > >
> > > > diff --git
> > > > a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/faraday,ftgmac100.yaml
> > > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/faraday,ftgmac100.yaml
> > > > index d14410018bcf6..bee9570a6f63f 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/faraday,ftgmac100.yaml
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/faraday,ftgmac100.yaml
> > > > @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ properties:
> > > >                - aspeed,ast2400-mac
> > > >                - aspeed,ast2500-mac
> > > >                - aspeed,ast2600-mac
> > > > +              - aspeed,ast2700-mac
> > > >            - const: faraday,ftgmac100
> > >
> > > [Severity: Low]
> > > With this patch, "aspeed,ast2700-mac", "faraday,ftgmac100" becomes a
> > > valid compatible pair. However, at this commit, ftgmac100_of_match[]
> > > in drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftgmac100.c has no aspeed,ast2700-mac
> > entry.
> > > Such a node could only bind through the generic faraday,ftgmac100
> > > entry (FTGMAC100_FARADAY).
> > >
> > > On that path, ftgmac100_probe() would do the following:
> > >
> > >   - program the ring-end bits at BIT(15) instead of the Aspeed BIT(30)
> > >   - leave is_aspeed false, so ftgmac100_setup_clk() never claims
> > >     MACCLK/RCLK
> > >   - register the embedded MDIO bus through ftgmac100_setup_mdio()
> > >   - never set a DMA mask wider than 32 bits
> > >
> > > Would an AST2700 node work correctly if it fell back to the Faraday
> > > match?
> > 
> > Sounds like no, can the submitter please clarify if the fallback is valid?
> > 
> 
> Agreed. I think the 'aspeed,ast2700-mac' should not be based on the 'faraday,ftgmac100'.
> Maybe the dt-bindings put ast2700-mac as a const like:
> ```
> ...
> properties:
>   compatible:
>     oneOf:
>       - const: faraday,ftgmac100
>       - const: aspeed,ast2700-mac             // as a const
>       - items:
>           - enum:
>               - aspeed,ast2400-mac
>               - aspeed,ast2500-mac
>               - aspeed,ast2600-mac
>           - const: faraday,ftgmac100

Looks good. I am curious whether the existing fallbacks used with other
aspeed devices are also inaccurate? Could be worth looking into?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature