On 12/5/24 8:12 PM, Paul Barker wrote:
Hi Marek,
On 28/10/2024 09:50, Paul Barker wrote:
On 27/10/2024 16:25, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 10/24/24 5:24 PM, Paul Barker wrote:
int ravb_of_to_plat(struct udevice *dev) { struct eth_pdata *pdata = dev_get_plat(dev);
- const fdt32_t *cell;
- if (bb_miiphy_index >= bb_miiphy_buses_num) {
dev_err(dev, "ravb driver supports only 1 or 2 devices!\n");Hmmmm, I really do not like this, can we make this dynamic ?
Unless you want to take a look at this yourself, I can add it into my todo ?
I think the real solution here would be to separate the bb_miiphy operations from the bus instance, so we would have something like:
struct bb_miiphy_bus { struct bb_miiphy_ops *ops; void *priv; }; struct bb_miiphy_ops { int (*init)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus); int (*mdio_active)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus); int (*mdio_tristate)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus); int (*set_mdio)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus, int v); int (*get_mdio)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus, int *v); int (*set_mdc)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus, int v); int (*delay)(struct bb_miiphy_bus *bus); }; int bb_miiphy_bus_register(const char *name, struct bb_miiphy_ops *ops, void *priv);Where drivers will call `bb_miiphy_bus_register()` from the probe function, it will create a `struct bb_miiphy_bus` instance and a `struct mii_dev` instance then call `mdio_register()`. The driver can then support an arbitrary number of MDIO busses from a single constant `struct bb_miiphy_ops` instance.
The bb_miiphy_getbus() function should be dropped from miiphy.c. Instead, the priv pointer in the `struct mii_dev` instance can point to the appropriate `struct bb_miiphy_bus` instance.
It looks like all users of CONFIG_BITBANGMII also set CONFIG_BITBANGMII_MULTI, and there don't seem to be any targets that define the macros documented in README.bitbangMII (lines 15-22). So, we can drop the non-BITBANGMII_MULTI code from miiphybb.c and simplify things a lot.
That's non-trivial but it's not a huge set of changes, maybe something we could target for v2024.04?
We've got several of the other patches from this series merged now after v2 so I'm coming back to this one. I think we should take this patch as-is and then follow up with general improvements to the bb_miiphy support. Are you happy with that? If so I will re-send it along with a re-worked version of patch 11 from this series (net: ravb: Add RZ/G2L Support).
I apologize for the horrible delay.
I just posted the bb_miiphy patches so maybe we can do it properly right from the start ?