Em dom., 17 de jul. de 2022 06:55, Paul Fertser <fercer...@gmail.com> escreveu: > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 11:32:52PM -0300, Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca wrote: > > It uses SOC := rtl8380 while all existing dgs-1210 F1 variants use > > rtl8382 (except for the pending -52 variant). The commit didn't > > mention why that happened. > > It's just cosmetic AFAICT but the datasheet clearly states that the > SoC used for <=18 ports switches is called RTL8380.
It seems we have multiple SoCs for DGS-1210: 1) RTL8380 for -10 2) RTL8382 for -28 3) RTL8393 for -52 It is not the best approach to include a shared config and redefine a property. The dgs-1210 definition should go in Makefile (we also have an rtl8393) with only common properties and SoC should be defined by each device. I was preparing something like that for -52 here: https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/pull/10227/commits/8e5b473bc1f7f1a8ad796e8b8cc7587fedbad9f5 > > > I'm not sure which one is correct here. However, if it is really a > > different SoC and with what we currently know, we could create a > > generic rtl83xx_d-link_dgs-1210.dtsi as the -52 variant uses even a > > more different SoC (rtl8393). They share a lot of stuff like flash > > layout and gpios (and the vendor firmware even uses the same image). I > > could do some generic and family review but I only have -28 and -52 > > variants. > > I only have access to non-PoE dgs-1210-10 R1 board. > > You say they share GPIO layout, does it mean you currently can't fully > handle SFP ports on your hardware but my patches make it work? I believe the same setup might work for any dgs-1210 F series. It makes sense as d-link uses a common firmware for Fx-Series. However, I didn't test SFP patches in my -28 because I lost all my 1g modules a couple years ago and 10g modules don't work. Anyway, the -52 variant does seem to share the same GPIOs, even using a different SoC. Besides reboot, reset button and led, I could only test the pin that detects the module presence. All of them match those same pins used by other variantes. I would expect that the remaining SFP pins are also at the same positions. I only tried SFP patches to fix (it didn't) the combo ports initialization in the -52 model, although they might touch another part of the driver not used by that device (as it uses different SoC). > > > -- > Be free, use free (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html) software! > mailto:fercer...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
