Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: stmmac: Add UltraRISC DP1000 GMAC support

[Maxime Chevallier]

Hi,

On 9/1/26 10:32, Jia Wang wrote:
> On 2026-09-01 09:29 +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 9/1/26 03:27, Jia Wang wrote:
>>> The DP1000 GMAC integration provides fixed TX and RX RGMII clock delays
>>> that cannot be disabled. For boards without PCB delays, "rgmii-id"
>>> describes the link, but passing that mode unchanged to the PHY would enable
>>> a second set of delays.
>>>
>>> Use phy_fix_phy_mode_for_mac_delays() to translate "rgmii-id" to "rgmii"
>>> before attaching the PHY. Reject other RGMII modes because the fixed MAC
>>> delays cannot be combined with them without duplicating or omitting a
>>> delay.
[...]
> 
> Thanks. I enabled CONFIG_STMMAC_SELFTESTS and ran the test on the Milk-V
> Titan with the new glue driver:
> 
>  1. MAC Loopback                 0
>  2. MMC Counters                 0
>  3. EEE                          -95
>  4. Hash Filter MC               0
>  5. Perfect Filter UC            -95
>  6. MC Filter                    -95
>  7. UC Filter                    -95
>  8. Flow Control                 0
>  9. RSS                          -95
> 10. VLAN Filtering               -110
> 11. VLAN Filtering (perf)        -110
> 12. Double VLAN Filter           -110
> 13. Double VLAN Filter (perf)    -110
> 14. Flexible RX Parser           -95
> 15. SA Insertion (desc)          0
> 16. SA Replacement (desc)        0
> 17. SA Insertion (reg)           0
> 18. SA Replacement (reg)         0
> 19. VLAN TX Insertion            -110
> 20. SVLAN TX Insertion           -110
> 21. L3 DA Filtering              -95
> 22. L3 SA Filtering              -95
> 23. L4 DA TCP Filtering          -95
> 24. L4 SA TCP Filtering          -95
> 25. L4 DA UDP Filtering          -95
> 26. L4 SA UDP Filtering          -95
> 27. ARP Offload                  -110
> 28. Jumbo Frame                  0
> 29. Multichannel Jumbo           -95
> 30. Split Header                 0
> 31. TBS (ETF Scheduler)          -95

Awesome, that's pretty-much what I expected, nothing too bad stands out :)

Code itself looks good, no obvious error, so

Reviewed-by: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Maxime