On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 10:33:28 -0500 Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> Andrew, Jakub,
>
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 10:28 AM Sven Van Asbroeck <thesve...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesve...@gmail.com>
> >
> > On the ksz8795, if the devicetree contains a cpu node,
> > devicetree parsing fails and the whole driver errors out.
> >
> > Fix the devicetree parsing code by making it use the
> > correct number of ports.
> >
> > Fixes: 912aae27c6af ("net: dsa: microchip: really look for phy-mode in port
> > nodes")
> > Tested-by: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesve...@gmail.com> # ksz8795
> > Signed-off-by: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesve...@gmail.com>
> > ---
>
> Any chance that this patch could still get merged?
> I believe this will work fine on both ksz8795 and ksz9477, even though
> num_ports
> is defined differently, because:
>
> ksz8795:
> /* set the real number of ports */
> dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt + 1;
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz8795.c?h=v5.10-rc7#n1266
>
> ksz9477:
> /* set the real number of ports */
> dev->ds->num_ports = dev->port_cnt;
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/net/dsa/microchip/ksz9477.c?h=v5.10-rc7#n1585
>
> Would it be possible to merge this into net, so users get working cpu nodes?
> I don't think this will prevent you from harmonizing port_cnt in net-next.
What I was talking about in the email yesterday was 0x8794 support
in ksz8795.c. Is the cpu port configuration going to work there?
Isn't the CPU port always port 5 (index 4)?
It sure as hell looked like it until commit c9f4633b93ea ("net: dsa:
microchip: remove usage of mib_port_count") came along. I wonder if
ksz8794 works on net-next :/
