On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 06:07:05PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 03:47:18PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 08:39:51PM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > > +static void sophgo_dwmac_fix_mac_speed(void *priv, unsigned int speed, unsigned int mode)
> > > +{
> > > + struct sophgo_dwmac *dwmac = priv;
> > > + long rate;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + rate = rgmii_clock(speed);
> > > + if (rate < 0) {
> > > + dev_err(dwmac->dev, "invalid speed %u\n", speed);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = clk_set_rate(dwmac->clk_tx, rate);
> > > + if (ret)
> > > + dev_err(dwmac->dev, "failed to set tx rate %ld: %pe\n",
> > > + rate, ERR_PTR(ret));
> > > +}
> >
> > There are a bunch of other platform support in stmmac that are doing
> > the same:
> >
> > dwmac-s32.c is virtually identical
> > dwmac-imx.c does the same, although has some pre-conditions
> > dwmac-dwc-qos-eth.c is virually identical but the two steps are split
> > across a bunch of register writes
> > dwmac-starfive.c looks the same
> > dwmac-rk.c also
> > dwmac-intel-plat.c also
> >
> > So, I wonder whether either this should be a helper, or whether core
> > code should be doing this. Maybe something to look at as a part of
> > this patch submission?
>
> Inochi, please could you look at the datasheet for this IP. Is the
> transmit clock a part of the IP?
I checked the ip databook and found it is part of the RGMII clock.
Also, I found RGMII also contains a rx clock following this quirk.
> Can we expect all devices integrating this IP to have such a clock?
> That would be a good indicator the clock handling should be moved
> into the core.
>
I am not sure all whether devices has this clock, but it appears in
the databook. So I think it is possible to move this in the core so
any platform with these clock can reuse it.
Regards,
Inochi
