Re: [PATCH RFC] Update documentation for KSZ DSA drivers so that new drivers can be added

From: Maxim Uvarov
Date: Fri Sep 08 2017 - 09:32:46 EST

2017-09-08 0:54 GMT+03:00 Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>:
>> -- compatible: For external switch chips, compatible string must be exactly one
>> - of: "microchip,ksz9477"
>> +- compatible: Should be "microchip,ksz9477" for KSZ9477 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8795" for KSZ8795 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8794" for KSZ8794 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8765" for KSZ8765 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8895" for KSZ8895 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8864" for KSZ8864 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8873" for KSZ8873 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8863" for KSZ8863 chip,
>> + "microchip,ksz8463" for KSZ8463 chip
>

all that chips have the same spi access to get chip id on probe(). I
prefer common microship,ksz-spi rather than somebody will always
maintain that list.

Maxim.

> This part of this patch should be in a patch of the series that
> actually adds support for these chips. Don't document chips until you
> actually support them.
>
>> See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dsa/dsa.txt for a list of additional required and optional properties.
>> @@ -13,60 +20,60 @@ Examples:
>>
>> Ethernet switch connected via SPI to the host, CPU port wired to eth0:
>>
>> - eth0: ethernet@10001000 {
>> - fixed-link {
>> - speed = <1000>;
>> - full-duplex;
>> - };
>> - };
>> + eth0: ethernet@10001000 {
>> + fixed-link {
>> + speed = <1000>;
>> + full-duplex;
>> + };
>> + };
>>
>> - spi1: spi@f8008000 {
>> - pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_spi_ksz>;
>> - cs-gpios = <&pioC 25 0>;
>> - id = <1>;
>> - status = "okay";
>> + spi1: spi@f8008000 {
>> + cs-gpios = <&pioC 25 0>;
>> + id = <1>;
>> + status = "okay";
>>
>> - ksz9477: ksz9477@0 {
>> - compatible = "microchip,ksz9477";
>> - reg = <0>;
>> + ksz9477: ksz9477@0 {
>> + compatible = "microchip,ksz9477";
>> + reg = <0>;
>>
>> - spi-max-frequency = <44000000>;
>> - spi-cpha;
>> - spi-cpol;
>> + spi-max-frequency = <44000000>;
>> + spi-cpha;
>> + spi-cpol;
>> +
>> + status = "okay";
>> + ports {
>> + #address-cells = <1>;
>> + #size-cells = <0>;
>> + port@0 {
>> + reg = <0>;
>> + label = "lan1";
>> + };
>> + port@1 {
>> + reg = <1>;
>> + label = "lan2";
>> + };
>> + port@2 {
>> + reg = <2>;
>> + label = "lan3";
>> + };
>> + port@3 {
>> + reg = <3>;
>> + label = "lan4";
>> + };
>> + port@4 {
>> + reg = <4>;
>> + label = "lan5";
>> + };
>> + port@5 {
>> + reg = <5>;
>> + label = "cpu";
>> + ethernet = <&eth0>;
>> + fixed-link {
>> + speed = <1000>;
>> + full-duplex;
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>> + };
>>
>> - status = "okay";
>> - ports {
>> - #address-cells = <1>;
>> - #size-cells = <0>;
>> - port@0 {
>> - reg = <0>;
>> - label = "lan1";
>> - };
>> - port@1 {
>> - reg = <1>;
>> - label = "lan2";
>> - };
>> - port@2 {
>> - reg = <2>;
>> - label = "lan3";
>> - };
>> - port@3 {
>> - reg = <3>;
>> - label = "lan4";
>> - };
>> - port@4 {
>> - reg = <4>;
>> - label = "lan5";
>> - };
>> - port@5 {
>> - reg = <5>;
>> - label = "cpu";
>> - ethernet = <&eth0>;
>> - fixed-link {
>> - speed = <1000>;
>> - full-duplex;
>> - };
>> - };
>> - };
>> - };
>> - };
>
> This part however is a nice cleanup. You can submit this patch as a
> separate patch, once netdev has opened again in about 10 days time.
>
> Andrew



--
Best regards,
Maxim Uvarov