Re: [PATCH net-next v4 04/10] dt-bindings: net: pcs: add rockchip,rk3568-xpcs support
From: Jakub Kicinski
Date: Sat Sep 12 2026 - 16:17:04 EST
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
---
dt-bindings: net: pcs: add rockchip,rk3568-xpcs support
This adds a new standalone schema describing the Synopsys DesignWare XPCS
as integrated on the Rockchip RK3568, with a CSR window, csr/eee clocks, a
Naneng Combo SerDes phy, a power domain and four MII child ports. A few
questions about the property set and the file naming below.
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/pcs/rockchip-dwxpcs.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/pcs/rockchip-dwxpcs.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000000..0852d0bcb66a2
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/pcs/rockchip-dwxpcs.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/net/pcs/rockchip-dwxpcs.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but should the file be named after the documented
compatible, i.e. rockchip,rk3568-xpcs.yaml? The other schemas in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/pcs/ all use that form:
snps,dw-xpcs.yaml, fsl,lynx-pcs.yaml, mediatek,sgmiisys.yaml,
renesas,rzn1-miic.yaml.
A rename would also have to update the $id line above, since it encodes the
same name.
Related: the example at the bottom uses pcs@fda00000 and pcs-mii@0, while
the sibling PCS binding uses the generic ethernet-pcs@... node name, and no
$nodename constraint is added here. The SoC dtsi added later in the series
copies the pcs@/pcs-mii@ names verbatim.
> +
> +title: Rockchip RK3568 Synopsys DesignWare Ethernet PCS
[ ... ]
> +properties:
> + compatible:
> + const: rockchip,rk3568-xpcs
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but would a set of SoC-specific if/then blocks in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/pcs/snps,dw-xpcs.yaml be preferred
over a second schema for the same IP?
To be clear, a snps,dw-xpcs fallback compatible or a $ref to that schema
would be wrong here. The glue driver added later in the series builds CSR
addresses with only a 3-bit MMD field:
return FIELD_PREP(0x70000, dev) | FIELD_PREP(0xffff, reg);
and remaps the vendor MMDs in xpcs_rk_mdio_read_remapping() /
xpcs_rk_mdio_write_remapping(), so the generic direct mapping described in
snps,dw-xpcs.yaml would compute different offsets.
So the only question is where the description should live, not whether the
compatible should be shared.
> +
> + reg:
> + maxItems: 1
[Severity: Low]
Should the sbd_intr_o output be described as an optional interrupts
property? With additionalProperties: false at the end of the file, a
conforming device tree cannot carry it, although adding it later stays
backward compatible.
The single unnamed 2 MiB window itself does match the driver:
xpcs_rk_init_res() uses platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0) and
requires resource_size(res) >= SZ_2M, and the largest computed offset
0x7FFFF << 2 = 0x1FFFFC still falls inside 0x200000, so reg-names and
reg-io-width are not needed.
> +
> + "#address-cells":
> + const: 1
> +
> + "#size-cells":
> + const: 0
> +
> + clocks:
> + items:
> + - description: APB3 bus interface clock (clk_csr_i), required for register access
> + - description: EEE clock (clk_eee_i), required for Energy Efficient Ethernet operation
> +
> + clock-names:
> + items:
> + - const: csr
> + - const: eee
> +
> + phys:
> + maxItems: 1
> +
> + phy-names:
> + const: serdes
> +
> + power-domains:
> + maxItems: 1
[Severity: Low]
Should resets/reset-names be described here too? The RK3568 CRU exposes
four dedicated reset lines for this block in
include/dt-bindings/clock/rk3568-cru.h:
#define SRST_XPCS 150
#define SRST_XPCS_TX_DIV10 151
#define SRST_XPCS_RX_DIV10 152
#define SRST_XPCS_XGXS_RX 153
Since the schema ends with additionalProperties: false, a conforming device
tree cannot express them at all, and the glue driver added later in the
series never requests a reset control, so it depends on those resets already
being de-asserted.
Peer blocks in the same island do describe theirs, e.g. combphy0 with
resets = <&cru SRST_PIPEPHY0> and gmac0 with resets = <&cru SRST_A_GMAC0>.
Note the XPCS core does provide a register-level reset via xpcs_soft_reset()
in drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs.c, so a state-machine restart is possible
without the CRU resets, and an optional resets property can be added later
without breaking the ABI.
> +
> +patternProperties:
> + "^pcs-mii@[0-3]$":
> + type: object
> + description:
> + One of the four MII ports of the XPCS. The port is linked to an
> + Ethernet MAC controller via the pcs-handle property in the MAC's
> + device tree node.
> +
> + properties:
> + reg:
> + description: MII port number.
> + enum: [0, 1, 2, 3]
[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but is pcs-mii@N the intended name for these per-port
children rather than the generic ethernet-pcs@N?
Resolving a MAC pcs-handle that points at one of these children does work
with the rest of the series: xpcs_rk_create() in
drivers/net/pcs/pcs-xpcs-rk.c reads the child reg, walks up with
of_get_parent() and calls xpcs_create_mdiodev(pxpcs->bus, port), and
rk_pcs_init() in drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/dwmac-rk.c does
of_parse_phandle(np, "pcs-handle", 0). So the open point is just the node
naming.
> +
> + required:
> + - reg
> +
> + additionalProperties: false
> +
> +required:
> + - compatible
> + - reg
> + - "#address-cells"
> + - "#size-cells"
> + - clocks
> + - clock-names
> + - phys
> + - phy-names
> + - power-domains
[Severity: Medium]
Does requiring phys and phy-names here make dtbs_check fail for the RK3568
boards? The SoC node added later in the same series omits both, because the
SerDes selection is board specific:
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3568.dtsi:
xpcs: pcs@fda00000 {
compatible = "rockchip,rk3568-xpcs";
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
reg = <0x0 0xfda00000 0x0 0x200000>;
clocks = <&cru PCLK_XPCS>, <&cru CLK_XPCS_EEE>;
clock-names = "csr", "eee";
power-domains = <&power RK3568_PD_PIPE>;
status = "disabled";
and only the board fills them in:
arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3568-photonicat.dts:
&xpcs {
status = "okay";
phys = <&combphy2 PHY_TYPE_SGMII>;
phy-names = "serdes";
};
dtschema validates nodes irrespective of status = "disabled", so wouldn't
every rk3568*.dtb apart from the Photonicat report "'phys', 'phy-names' are
required properties"?
Should phys/phy-names be dropped from required (or made conditional), or
should the SoC dtsi carry them instead?
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> + - |
> + #include <dt-bindings/clock/rk3568-cru.h>
> + #include <dt-bindings/power/rk3568-power.h>
> + #include <dt-bindings/phy/phy.h>
> +
> + pcs@fda00000 {
> + compatible = "rockchip,rk3568-xpcs";
> + reg = <0xfda00000 0x200000>;
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> + clocks = <&cru PCLK_XPCS>, <&cru CLK_XPCS_EEE>;
> + clock-names = "csr", "eee";
> + phys = <&combphy2 PHY_TYPE_SGMII>;
> + phy-names = "serdes";
> + power-domains = <&power RK3568_PD_PIPE>;
> +
> + pcs-mii@0 {
> + reg = <0>;
> + };
> + };