On Wed Oct 21 2020, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 10/21/2020 5:16 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 08:52:01AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
>>> On Mon Oct 19 2020, Christian Eggers wrote:
>>> The node names should be switch. See dsa.yaml.
>>>
>>>> + compatible = "microchip,ksz9477";
>>>> + reg = <0>;
>>>> + reset-gpios = <&gpio5 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
>>>> +
>>>> + spi-max-frequency = <44000000>;
>>>> + spi-cpha;
>>>> + spi-cpol;
>>>> +
>>>> + ports {
>>>
>>> ethernet-ports are preferred.
>>
>> This is backwards to me, instead of an 'ethernet-switch' with 'ports',
>> we have a 'switch' with 'ethernet-ports'. Whatever.
>
> The rationale AFAIR was that dual Ethernet port controllers like TI's
> CPSW needed to describe each port as a pseudo Ethernet MAC and using
> 'ethernet-ports' as a contained allowed to disambiguate with the 'ports'
> container used in display subsystem descriptions.
Yes, that was the outcome of previous discussions.
> We should probably enforce or recommend 'ethernet-switch' to be used
> as the node name for Ethernet switch devices though.
After using grep, it seems like 'ethernet-switch' as well as simply
'switch' are being used today. Yes, maybe both should be allowed.
Thanks,
Kurt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
