Re: [PATCH net 2/7] net: dsa: mt7530: fix phylink for port 5 and fix port 5 modes

[Arınç ÜNAL]

On 27.03.2023 21:49, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 05:08:13PM +0300, arinc9.unal@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > There're two call paths for setting up port 5:
> >
> > mt7530_setup()
> > -> mt7530_setup_port5()
> >
> > mt753x_phylink_mac_config()
> > -> mt753x_mac_config()
> >     -> mt7530_mac_config()
> >        -> mt7530_setup_port5()
> >
> > The first call path is supposed to run when phy muxing is being used. In
> > this case, port 5 is somewhat of a hidden port. It won't be defined on the
> > devicetree so phylink can't be used to manage the port.
> >
> > The second call path used to call mt7530_setup_port5() directly under case
> > 5 on mt7530_phylink_mac_config() before it was moved to mt7530_mac_config()
> > with 88bdef8be9f6 ("net: dsa: mt7530: Extend device data ready for adding a
> > new hardware"). mt7530_setup_port5() will never run through this call path
> > because the current code on mt7530_setup() bypasses phylink for all cases
> > of port 5.
> >
> > Leave it to phylink if port 5 is used as a CPU port or a user port. For the
> > cases of phy muxing or the port being disabled, call mt7530_setup_port5()
> > directly from mt7530_setup_port5() without involving phylink.
>
> You probably don't mean "call X() from X()" (that would make it recursive),
> but maybe from mt7530_setup(). But it was already called from mt7530_setup(),
> so I don't understand what is being transmitted here...

Oops, I meant to say call mt7530_setup_port5() directly from 
mt7530_setup() without involving phylink. Will fix.

> > Move setting the interface and P5_DISABLED mode to a more specific
> > location. They're supposed to be overwritten if phy muxing is detected.
> >
> > Add comments which explain the process.
> >
> > Fixes: 38f790a80560 ("net: dsa: mt7530: Add support for port 5")
> > Tested-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand... so what was the problem, and how does the
> movement of the mt7530_setup_port5() call that isn't under phylink solve
> that problem?

Port 5 being used as a CPU or user port was being set up from 
mt7530_setup() instead of using phylink. This patch fixes that.

Arınç