Re: [PATCH 5/5] arm64: dts: renesas: r8a779f0: spider: Enable Ethernet Switch

[Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>]

> +	ports {
> +		#address-cells = <1>;
> +		#size-cells = <0>;
> +		port@0 {
> +			reg = <0>;
> +			phy-handle = <&etha0>;
> +			phy-mode = "sgmii";
> +			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#size-cells = <0>;
> +			etha0: ethernet-phy@0 {
> +				reg = <1>;

reg = 1 means you should have @1.


> +				compatible = "ethernet-phy-ieee802.3-c45";
> +			};
> +		};

You are mixing Ethernet and MDIO properties in one node. Past
experience says this is a bad idea, particularly when you have
switches involved. I would suggest you add an mdio container:


> +		port@1 {
> +			reg = <1>;
> +			phy-handle = <&etha1>;
> +			phy-mode = "sgmii";
> +			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#size-cells = <0>;

                        mdio {
> +			    etha1: ethernet-phy@1 {
> +				reg = <2>;
> +				compatible = "ethernet-phy-ieee802.3-c45";
> +			    };
                        };
> +		};
> +		port@2 {
> +			reg = <2>;
> +			phy-handle = <&etha2>;
> +			phy-mode = "sgmii";
> +			#address-cells = <1>;
> +			#size-cells = <0>;
> +			etha2: ethernet-phy@2 {
> +				reg = <3>;
> +				compatible = "ethernet-phy-ieee802.3-c45";
> +			};
> +		};

I find it interesting you have PHYs are address 1, 2, 3, even though
they are on individual busses. Why pay for the extra pullup/down
resistors when they could all have the same address?

	  Andrew