On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:26 PM Alex Marginean <alexm.ossl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Nevo, > > On 6/14/2019 7:55 PM, Nevo Hed wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > > In another thread > > (https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2019-June/371933.html) > > I asked Ken (before learning of their cut-backs) if I should take a > > stab at re-integrating his work > > where Joe also pointed out the impending acceptance of your work. > > > > I'm not sure where we left off here in this thread and wondering if > > you are working on that or not. Ive been staring at this for a bit > > and ready to take a stab at it if you are not. > > I am planning to add helpers to MDIO uclass, along the lines Ken sent > initially, on top of the current patch. It looks like the helpers would > fit just fine. I didn't get to do it yet though.
I'm intending to take this as is... I assume that fits with your plan for this. Thanks, -Joe > > One difference between the two DM MDIO implementations is the way MDIO > ops work, the patch I sent abstracts away the legacy mii_bus from DM > MDIO driver. I would keep that as it, which means a bit more rework on > the marvell driver. I didn't look into this in detail yet. > I think I can send a version of the helpers in [1] in about a week, > maybe more, right now I'm trying to get MDIO MUX DM support out for > review plus some updates for the NXP platform I'm working on. I can > take a stab at porting the marvell driver too, but I can't test it. > If you want to put some time into this right now feel free to do it :) > > > > > if easier - i'm `nhed73` on the #u-boot irc channel > > > > Thanks > > ---Nevo > > I can join if you want to discuss details, let me know. > > Thanks! > Alex > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:04 AM Alexandru Marginean > > <alexandru.margin...@nxp.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Ken, > >> > >> On 6/11/2019 12:44 PM, Ken Ma wrote: > >>> Hi Alex > >>> > >>> Thanks a lot for your information! > >>> > >>> I think our patches have no essential difference. > >>> The 2 patches have only small implementation difference: > >>> In my patch, mii bus ops functions(read/write/reset...) need to be > >>> implemented while in your patch mdio bus functions need to be > >>> implemented and then mii bus ops functions will call mdio bus ops > >>> functions. > I had planned to reuse those existed mii ops functions such > >>> as > >>> smc911x_miiphy_read/ smc911x_miiphy_write/ sun8i_mdio_read/ > >>> sun8i_mdio_write... then it is easy for turning old mdio driver to > >>> DM. > > >>> Now I am not working on u-boot, so I am sorry that I will not do the > >>> pulling work. > >>> > >>> Yours, > >>> Ken > >> > >> OK, I think I get what you wanted to do. Either way it's not too > >> difficult to convert existing MDIOs to DM, but they have to start using > >> struct udevice. That's similar to what was done on DM_ETH and others. > >> > >> The helpers mapping eth/phy/mdio make sense and could be useful, that's > >> something I'll try to look into. > >> > >> Thank you! > >> Alex > >> > >> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Alex Marginean <alexm.ossl...@gmail.com> > >>> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2019 9:18 AM > >>> To: joe.hershber...@ni.com; Ken Ma <m...@marvell.com> > >>> Cc: u-boot <u-boot@lists.denx.de>; Joseph Hershberger > >>> <joseph.hershber...@ni.com> > >>> Subject: [EXT] Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2 v3] net: introduce MDIO DM class > >>> for MDIO devices > >>> > >>> External Email > >>> > >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> +Ken, > >>> > >>> Hi Joe, > >>> > >>> On 6/10/2019 11:25 PM, Joe Hershberger wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 11:11 AM Alex Marginean <alexm.ossl...@gmail.com> > >>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Adds UCLASS_MDIO DM class supporting MDIO buses that are probed as > >>>>> stand-alone devices. Useful in particular for systems that support > >>>>> DM_ETH and have a stand-alone MDIO hardware block shared by multiple > >>>>> Ethernet interfaces. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Marginean <alexm.ossl...@gmail.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> > >>>>> Changes in v2: > >>>>> - fixed several comments using wrong API names > >>>>> - dropped dm_ from names of internal functions that don't > >>>>> use udevice * > >>>>> - fixed UCLASS driver name > >>>>> - added missing mdio_unregister in dm_mdio_pre_remove > >>>>> - added a comment on why spaces in names aren't ok > >>>>> - added a comment on how static mdio_read/_write/_reset > >>>>> functions > >>>>> are used > >>>>> Changes in v3: > >>>>> - none > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Not sure if you already noticed this [1] or not, but there may be > >>>> something there that you want to incorporate or maybe not. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> -Joe > >>>> > >>>> [1] - https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/939726/ > >>>> > >>> > >>> I didn't notice it, thanks for pointing it out! > >>> Apart from the obvious overlap of adding UCLASS_MDIO and code like > >>> _post_probe they seem to deal with different needs. > >>> > >>> Ken, can you please take a look at the patch I sent? It has a wrapper > >>> over phy_connect, but provides no helpers on how the caller would get the > >>> PHY ADDR. Do you want to try pulling the API you add on top of the patch > >>> I sent, or do you want me to try? It looks like it would work with > >>> minimal effort. > >>> > >>> Thank you! > >>> Alex > >>> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> U-Boot mailing list > >> U-Boot@lists.denx.de > >> https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > > _______________________________________________ > > U-Boot mailing list > > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot > > > > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
