Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Sep 2017 23:54:17 +0200 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] Update documentation for KSZ DSA drivers so that new drivers can be added |
| |
> -- compatible: For external switch chips, compatible string must be exactly one > - of: "microchip,ksz9477" > +- compatible: Should be "microchip,ksz9477" for KSZ9477 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8795" for KSZ8795 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8794" for KSZ8794 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8765" for KSZ8765 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8895" for KSZ8895 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8864" for KSZ8864 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8873" for KSZ8873 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8863" for KSZ8863 chip, > + "microchip,ksz8463" for KSZ8463 chip
This part of this patch should be in a patch of the series that actually adds support for these chips. Don't document chips until you actually support them.
> See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dsa/dsa.txt for a list of additional required and optional properties. > @@ -13,60 +20,60 @@ Examples: > > Ethernet switch connected via SPI to the host, CPU port wired to eth0: > > - eth0: ethernet@10001000 { > - fixed-link { > - speed = <1000>; > - full-duplex; > - }; > - }; > + eth0: ethernet@10001000 { > + fixed-link { > + speed = <1000>; > + full-duplex; > + }; > + }; > > - spi1: spi@f8008000 { > - pinctrl-0 = <&pinctrl_spi_ksz>; > - cs-gpios = <&pioC 25 0>; > - id = <1>; > - status = "okay"; > + spi1: spi@f8008000 { > + cs-gpios = <&pioC 25 0>; > + id = <1>; > + status = "okay"; > > - ksz9477: ksz9477@0 { > - compatible = "microchip,ksz9477"; > - reg = <0>; > + ksz9477: ksz9477@0 { > + compatible = "microchip,ksz9477"; > + reg = <0>; > > - spi-max-frequency = <44000000>; > - spi-cpha; > - spi-cpol; > + spi-max-frequency = <44000000>; > + spi-cpha; > + spi-cpol; > + > + status = "okay"; > + ports { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <0>; > + port@0 { > + reg = <0>; > + label = "lan1"; > + }; > + port@1 { > + reg = <1>; > + label = "lan2"; > + }; > + port@2 { > + reg = <2>; > + label = "lan3"; > + }; > + port@3 { > + reg = <3>; > + label = "lan4"; > + }; > + port@4 { > + reg = <4>; > + label = "lan5"; > + }; > + port@5 { > + reg = <5>; > + label = "cpu"; > + ethernet = <ð0>; > + fixed-link { > + speed = <1000>; > + full-duplex; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + }; > > - status = "okay"; > - ports { > - #address-cells = <1>; > - #size-cells = <0>; > - port@0 { > - reg = <0>; > - label = "lan1"; > - }; > - port@1 { > - reg = <1>; > - label = "lan2"; > - }; > - port@2 { > - reg = <2>; > - label = "lan3"; > - }; > - port@3 { > - reg = <3>; > - label = "lan4"; > - }; > - port@4 { > - reg = <4>; > - label = "lan5"; > - }; > - port@5 { > - reg = <5>; > - label = "cpu"; > - ethernet = <ð0>; > - fixed-link { > - speed = <1000>; > - full-duplex; > - }; > - }; > - }; > - }; > - };
This part however is a nice cleanup. You can submit this patch as a separate patch, once netdev has opened again in about 10 days time.
Andrew
| |