Hi Peppe and Lars, On 23-11-2016 10:59, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote: > Hello Joao, Lars. > > On 11/22/2016 3:16 PM, Joao Pinto wrote: >>> Ok, it makes sense. >>> > Just for curiosity the target setup is the following: >>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8V-LB5y2Cos >>> > but instead of using internal drivers, we desire to use mainline drivers >>> > only. >>> > >>> > Thanks! >> Regarding this subject, I am thinking of making the following adaption: >> >> a) delete ethernet/synopsys >> b) rename ethernet/stmicro/stmmac to ethernet/synopsys >> >> and send you a patch for you to evaluate. Both agree with the approach? >> To have a new work base would be important, because I will add to the "new" >> structure some missing QoS features like Multichannel support, CBS and later >> TSN. > > IMO, we have to agree on a common strategy making the change for > net-next; I imaged the following steps:
Yes it makes totally sense. > > - to port missing feature or fixes from ethernet/synopsys > inside the stmmac taking care about the documentation too. @Lars: You are familiar with the synopsys qos driver. Could you please do this porting. You can also make an analysis of what to port and I can do the porting for you if you don't have the availability for it. > - remove ethernet/synopsys > - rename ethernet/stmicro/stmmac to ethernet/synopsys I volunteer to do this task. > > These latest two have some relevant impacts. > > This change should be propagated to all the platforms that are using: > CONFIG_SYNOPSYS_DWC_ETH_QOS and CONFIG_STMMAC_ETH > plus device-tree compatibility. I volunteer to do this task also. > > - enhance the stmmac with new features and new glue (part of these > can be anticipated for sure). I have to implement 3 new features for now, but I will take some time for it, so I would suggest to make the previous task and incrementally add features. > > what do you think? does it make sense? If yes, we can also > understand how/who starts. > > Regards, > Peppe Thanks and regards. Joao > >> Thanks. >
