Hello.
On 09/03/2015 10:23 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
The existing fixed_phy_add() function has several drawbacks that
prevents it from being used as is for OF-based declaration of fixed
PHYs:
* The address of the PHY on the fake bus needs to be passed, while a
dynamic allocation is desired.
* Since the phy_device instantiation is post-poned until the next
mdiobus scan, there is no way to associate the fixed PHY with its
OF node, which later prevents of_phy_connect() from finding this
fixed PHY from a given OF node.
To solve this, this commit introduces fixed_phy_register(), which will
allocate an available PHY address, add the PHY using fixed_phy_add()
and instantiate the phy_device structure associated with the provided
OF node.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/phy/fixed.c | 61
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/phy_fixed.h | 11 +++++++++
2 files changed, 72 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c b/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
index e41546d..d60d875 100644
--- a/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
+++ b/drivers/net/phy/fixed.c
[...]
@@ -203,6 +204,66 @@ err_regs:
[...]
+int fixed_phy_register(unsigned int irq,
+ struct fixed_phy_status *status,
+ struct device_node *np)
+{
+ struct fixed_mdio_bus *fmb = &platform_fmb;
+ struct phy_device *phy;
+ int phy_addr;
+ int ret;
+
+ /* Get the next available PHY address, up to PHY_MAX_ADDR */
+ spin_lock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
+ if (phy_fixed_addr == PHY_MAX_ADDR) {
+ spin_unlock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
+ return -ENOSPC;
+ }
+ phy_addr = phy_fixed_addr++;
+ spin_unlock(&phy_fixed_addr_lock);
+
+ ret = fixed_phy_add(PHY_POLL, phy_addr, status);
Was rummaging in the fixed_phy driver and a bug sprang right at me:
'phy' should have been passed here, not PHY_POLL. Luckily, all callers
pass PHY_POLL anyway...
Are we looking at the same header file for the prototype of fixed_phy_add()?
Probably not. I was looking at Linus' tree, yours is probably net-next. :-)
extern int fixed_phy_add(unsigned int irq, int phy_id,
struct fixed_phy_status *status,
int link_gpio);
First argument is correct here..
No, fixed_phy_register() gets 'irq' passed to it and it should in its turn
call fixed_phy_add() with this argument, not PHY_POLL; otherwise the 'irq'
parameter gets completely ignored...
at any rate, if something needs fixing, just go ahead and submit a patch.
OK.
--
Florian
MBR, Sergei
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
