On 25/01/2023 17:52, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
On 25.01.2023 19:45, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
Am 20. Januar 2023 21:53:14 MEZ schrieb "Arınç ÜNAL" <arinc.unal@xxxxxxxxxx>:
index 25d31e40a553..5eb698a90d34 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
@@ -981,6 +981,20 @@ eth: ethernet@1b100000 {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
status = "disabled";
+
+ gmac0: mac@0 {
+ compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
+ reg = <0>;
+ phy-mode = "trgmii";
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
+
+ gmac1: mac@1 {
+ compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
+ reg = <1>;
+ phy-mode = "rgmii";
+ status = "disabled";
+ };
};
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
index 5008115d2494..a5800a524302 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
@@ -175,9 +175,7 @@ ð {
status = "okay";
gmac0: mac@0 {
Should node not be accessed with label (&gmac0) instead of defining it again
and shadow the one from dtsi?
I think that's up to preference. I kept it the current way as it's cleaner than
taking it out of ð.
I'd prefer to do use the label, so that we stay consistent in the source tree.
I'll remove the whole series for now. Please provide a v2.
Thanks,
Matthias