On 31/10/2024 15:43, Jan Petrous wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 08:13:40AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2024 at 09:24:56PM +0100, Jan Petrous (OSS) wrote:
>>> + plat->init = s32_gmac_init;
>>> + plat->exit = s32_gmac_exit;
>>> + plat->fix_mac_speed = s32_fix_mac_speed;
>>> +
>>> + plat->bsp_priv = gmac;
>>> +
>>> + return stmmac_pltfr_probe(pdev, plat, &res);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static const struct of_device_id s32_dwmac_match[] = {
>>> + { .compatible = "nxp,s32g2-dwmac" },
>>> + { .compatible = "nxp,s32g3-dwmac" },
>>> + { .compatible = "nxp,s32r-dwmac" },
>>
>> Why do you need three same entries?
>>
>
> We have three different SoCs and in v3 review you told me
> to return all back:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/comment/26067257/
It was about binding, not driver.
I also asked there: use proper fallback and compatibility. Both comments
of course affect your driver, but why choosing only first part?
>
> I'm not sure if we need s32g3 variant, it should depend on
> changes between s32g2 and s32g3, but s32r will definitely
> carry the interface max-speed value when SGMII support will
> be added.
>
> BR.
> /Jan
Best regards,
Krzysztof
