On 12/4/20 2:49 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
static const struct of_device_id gswip_of_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "lantiq,xrx200-gswip", .data = &gswip_xrx200 },
+ { .compatible = "lantiq,xrx300-gswip", .data = &gswip_xrx300 },
+ { .compatible = "lantiq,xrx330-gswip", .data = &gs
> static const struct of_device_id gswip_of_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "lantiq,xrx200-gswip", .data = &gswip_xrx200 },
> + { .compatible = "lantiq,xrx300-gswip", .data = &gswip_xrx300 },
> + { .compatible = "lantiq,xrx330-gswip", .data = &gswip_xrx300 },
> {},
Is there an I
Hi,
This looks good.
I haven't checked all the differences between the SoCs, but found some
minor problems in the code for the port configuration.
On 12/3/20 11:03 PM, Aleksander Jan Bajkowski wrote:
From: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski
This patch allows you to use all phs on GRX300 and GRX330.
From: Aleksander Jan Bajkowski
This patch allows you to use all phs on GRX300 and GRX330. The ARX300 has 3
and the GRX330 has 4 integrated PHYs connected to different ports compared
to VRX200.
Port configurations:
xRX200:
GMAC0: RGMII port
GMAC1: RGMII port
GMAC2: GPHY0 (GMII)
GMAC3: GPHY0 (MII
