> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
>
> The compatible string should describe what programming interface is
> present. Other information should be in other properties. Having the
> same compatible for tx and rx definitely seems wrong.
>
> -Scott
>
Hi Scott, what we tried to accomplish here is to avoid updating u-boot for this new compatible and have minimal additions to the binding document.
We currently know that:
"fsl,fman-v3-port-rx" is an Rx port that can work in 1G mode
"fsl,fman-v3-port-tx" is an Tx port that can work in 1G mode
We proposed adding a new optional compatible "fsl,fman-v3-best-effort-port" such that:
"fsl,fman-v3-port-rx" is an Rx port that can work in 1G mode
"fsl,fman-v3-port-tx" is an Tx port that can work in 1G mode
"fsl,fman-v3-port-rx", "fsl,fman-v3-best-effort-port" is an Rx port that can work in 1G mode and also in limited resourced 10G mode
"fsl,fman-v3-port-tx", "fsl,fman-v3-best-effort-port" is an Tx port that can work in 1G mode and also in limited resourced 10G mode
The only code addition required is in the Linux driver, code that checks for the optional, supplemental parameter "fsl,fman-v3-best-effort-port" to change some resource allocations.
Madalin
��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
