> Ugh, you're right. Both the syscon block, the register offset and the > bit position in those registers are different from gmac0 to gmac1, and > since we need a phandle to the syscon block anyway passing those two > other parameters as arguments is probably the nicest solution. For the > next version I'd change the 2nd argument from mask to the bit position > though. It seems the field is always 3 bits wide and this makes it a > little clearer that we're not just putting register values in the > device tree. I prefer bit position over mask. But please fully document this in the device tree. This is something a board developer is going to get wrong, because they assume MAC blocks are identical, and normally need identical configuration. I assume this is also a hardware 'bug', and the next generation of the silicon will have this fixed? So this will go away? Andrew
