From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2020 7:50 AM > > Yes, I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. > > Correct. > > > > > The problem is just that there are already .dtsi files for i.MX chips > > having multiple ethernet interfaces in the mainline kernel (at least > > imx6ui.dtsi, imx6sx.dts, imx7d.dtsi) > > Vybrid is one i use a lot with two FECs. > > > but that this patch series does not > > modify those files to use the new DT format. > > > > It currently only modifies the dts files that are already supported by > > hardcoded values in the driver. > > Exactly. This patch set itself adds nothing we don't already support. > So the patch set as is, is pointless. > > > As to not knowing which instance it shouldn't matter. > > The base dtsi can declare both/all ethernet interfaces with the > > appropriate GPR bits. > > I fully agree. All it needs for this patchset to be merged is another patch which > adds GPR properties to all SoC .dtsi files where appropriate, and optionally to > a couple of reference designs which support WoL on their ports. > > Andrew Okay, I will add imx6ul/imx6sx/imx7d/imx8mq/imx8mm/imx8mn dts change into the patch set in v2 version. (before, I plan to submit another patch for them once the patch set is accepted).
