在 2023/3/6 21:06:20, Andrew Lunn 写道: >> 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 Hi Andrew, Yes, the hardware design does not take into account the feasibility of the software. The next version will be fixed. Thank you. I will use bit position instead of mask, which is described in detail in the document. Best regards, Samin -- Best regards, Samin
