On 08/08/23 5:52 pm, Roger Quadros wrote: > > > On 08/08/2023 15:18, Md Danish Anwar wrote: >> On 08/08/23 5:38 pm, Conor Dooley wrote: >>> On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:30:43PM +0530, MD Danish Anwar wrote: >>>> This series introduces Industrial Ethernet Peripheral (IEP) driver to >>>> support timestamping of ethernet packets and thus support PTP and PPS >>>> for PRU ICSSG ethernet ports. >>>> >>>> This series also adds 10M full duplex support for ICSSG ethernet driver. >>>> >>>> There are two IEP instances. IEP0 is used for packet timestamping while IEP1 >>>> is used for 10M full duplex support. >>>> >>>> This is v2 of the series [v1]. It addresses comments made on [v1]. >>>> This series is based on linux-next(#next-20230807). >>>> >>>> Changes from v1 to v2: >>>> *) Addressed Simon's comment to fix reverse xmas tree declaration. Some APIs >>>> in patch 3 and 4 were not following reverse xmas tree variable declaration. >>>> Fixed it in this version. >>>> *) Addressed Conor's comments and removed unsupported SoCs from compatible >>>> comment in patch 1. >>> >>> I'm sorry I missed responding there before you sent v2, it was a bank >>> holiday yesterday. I'm curious why you removed them, rather than just >>> added them with a fallback to the ti,am654-icss-iep compatible, given >>> your comment that "the same compatible currently works for all these >>> 3 SoCs". >> >> I removed them as currently the driver is being upstreamed only for AM654x, >> once I start up-streaming the ICSSG driver for AM64 and any other SoC. I will >> add them here. If at that time we are still using same compatible, then I will >> modify the comment otherwise add new compatible. >> >> As of now, I don't see the need of adding other SoCs in iep binding as IEP >> driver up-streaming is only planned for AM654x as of now. > > But, is there any difference in IEP hardware/driver for the other SoCs? > AFAIK the same IP is used on all SoCs. > > If there is no hardware/code change then we don't need to introduce a new compatible. > The comment for all SoCs can already be there right from the start. > There is no code change. The same compatible is used for other SoCs. Even if the code is same I was thinking to keep the compatible as below now - ti,am654-icss-iep # for K3 AM65x SoCs and once other SoCs are introduced, I will just modify the comment, - ti,am654-icss-iep # for K3 AM65x, AM64x SoCs But we can also keep the all SoCs in comment right from start as well. I am fine with both. Conor / Roger, Please let me know which approach should I go with in next revision? -- Thanks and Regards, Danish.
