On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:29 PM, Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I mean the same terminology used in marvell's switch.(I don't think >> there is more than one terminology for this, please correct me if >> wrong). >> Anyway, I can see examples how it is done, but I don't understand the >> benefit of this constellation, and why device tree needs to be >> familiar with it. >> >> < switch 1 >---port10--------port10- < switch 2 > >> | ....| | | ....| | >> port 1-9 | port 1-9 | >> | | >> | | >> <cpu>--mdio---------------------------------------------- > > Your ASCII art is all messed up, but i get what you mean. > > This is the D in DSA. You would use this when a single switch does not > have enough ports for your use case. So you use two switches. > > You need to tell each switch what links are used to get to other > switches. There is an internal routing table. So you need to describe > these links in device tree. >
I understand, thanks, So, it is used so that the 2 switch will behave as if it is one big switch. Yet, how does it change the way the ports appears in "ifconfig" ? Is it that if they were separate switch I wouldn't see incremental numbers in "lanX" in ifconfig (as is probably the result in cascaded switch) ? Regards, ranran > Andrew
