On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:39:58PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:34:04PM CEST, ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:30:28PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 01:11:30PM CEST, ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org wrote: > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> >@@ -2711,6 +2789,10 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dt(struct cpsw_platform_data > >> >*data, > >> > if (of_property_read_bool(node, "dual_emac")) > >> > data->switch_mode = CPSW_DUAL_EMAC; > >> > > >> >+ /* switchdev overrides DTS */ > >> >+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TI_CPSW_SWITCHDEV)) > >> >+ data->switch_mode = CPSW_SWITCHDEV; > >> > >> So you force CPSW_SWITCHDEV mode if the CONFIG_TI_CPSW_SWITCHDEV is > >> enabled. That does not sound right. I think that user should tell what > >> mode does he want regardless what the kernel config is. > >We discussed this during the V1 of the RFC. Yes it doesn't seem good, but the > >device currently configures the modes using DTS (which is not correct). I > >choose > >the .config due to that. I can't think of anything better, but i am open to > >suggestions > > Agreed that DTS does fit as well. I think that this might be a job for > devlink parameters (patchset is going to be sent upstream next week). > You do have 1 bus address for the whole device (both ports), right? > Yes devlink sounds reasonable. I thyink there's only one bus for it, but then again i am far from an expert on the hardware interrnals. Grygorii can correct me if i am wrong.
Thanks for taking time to read this, Ilias
