On 09/09/2021 01:04, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote:
> I'm not really in a position to give advice, but -imho- unless those > other targets have at least proof-of-concept code for using qca8k on > their devices /working/ and an intention to migrate to DSA for these > devices within reasonable time frame, I personally wouldn't overthink > this (yet). > > There is no problem with adding these patches for ipq806x first, and then > moving the patches from ipq806x to generic later, when there is something > tangible for ath79 or bcm53xx (as part of their PRs/ patch series to > migrate from swconfig to qca8k). In fact we are at this stage with the bcm53xx Meraki MX65[1] which is just about ready to go, but requires part of Ansuel's series which is currently destined for ipq806x only in his PR[2]. This may be held up while more devices are tested so my suggestion is to get the series into generic/backports so the MX65 can use it while testing continues on other platforms. Moving it later would mean having some duplication in the bcm53xx/ipq806x platform directories until then. Perhaps that is acceptable if it will only be temporary? The other, perhaps main question is whether reintroducing dsa.mk is the correct approach. Adding the kmod to the relevant platform's modules.mk or kernel/linux/modules/netdevices.mk are alternatives. I am happy to submit a patch for whichever option is preferred, though whether this should be done within my PR, as a new PR or on the mailing list I'm not sure. I also don't wish to interfere with Ansuel's work so would prefer to have the idea accepted by him first before doing anything. [1] https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/3996 [2] https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/4036 Matthew _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
