Re: [PATCH net-next 02/13] phy: add the mvebu cp110 comphy driver

[Andrew Lunn]

> +static const struct mvebu_comhy_conf mvebu_comphy_modes[] = {
> +	/* lane 0 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(0, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 1 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(1, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 2 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 3 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(3, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2),
> +	/* lane 4 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x2),
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +	/* lane 5 */
> +	MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(5, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1),
> +};

Do other Marvell SoCs re-use this IP? Maybe add cp110 to the name here
to indicate what SoC this configuration belongs to? I guess at some
point, the compatible string will be used to select the correct table
for the hardware variant.

> +static const struct of_device_id mvebu_comphy_of_match_table[] = {
> +	{ .compatible = "marvell,comphy-cp110" },

Is that specific enough? It seems like this table is easy to change in
the VHDL. Could there be another cp110 with a different configuration?

    Andrew