[PATCH 2/2] net: mv643xx_eth: proper initialization for Kirkwood SoCs

Jason Cooper jason at lakedaemon.net
Sat May 25 02:46:36 EST 2013

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 01:01:40PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 02:40:28PM -0400, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > But there is a larger problem here then just this one bit.
> > > 
> > > The PSC1 register must be set properly for the board layout, and today
> > > we rely on the bootloader to set it. In fact, even with Sebastian's
> > > change the ethernet port won't work without bootloader
> > > intervention. The PortReset bit should also be cleared by the driver
> > > (and it is only present on some variants of this IP block,
> > > apparently).
> > > 
> > > We know that some Marvell SOC's wack the ethernet registers when they
> > > clock gate, and the flip of Clk125Bypass is another symptom of this
> > > general problem.
> > > 
> > > So, long term, the PSC1 must be fully set by the driver, based on DT
> > > information describing the board (eg RGMII/MII/1000Base-X [SFP] Phy
> > > type), and the layout of this register seems to vary on a SOC by SOC
> > > basis.
> > > 
> > > Thus, I think it is appropriate to call this variant of the eth IP
> > > 'marvell,kirkwood-eth' which indicates that the register block follows
> > > the kirkwood manual and the PSC1 register specifically has the
> > > kirkwood layout.
> > 
> > Ok, so mv643xx_eth would match both "marvell,orion-eth" and
> > "marvell,kirkwood-eth", then write to PSC1 iff it sees a node matching
> > "marvell,kirkwood-eth".  I'm not too keen on that, however, the matching
> > of the machine doesn't look to good, either.
> Why are you not keen on this? It seems like normal device driver
> practice, that is what the data field of of_device_id is typically
> used for..

I'm not keen on it because we don't have a document saying "All kirkwood
SoCs need PSC1 set to X after reset."  We know it, but have we tested
the 6282?

That being said, if "marvell,kirkwood-eth" is the best we can do for
now, I'm all for it.  I would just like to be reasonably certain that
the binding we are creating doesn't lock us into a difficult decision

> There are more compatible strings than just kirkwood and orion in this
> buisness (affecting PPC/MIPS) should also someday be captured with
> compatible strings rather than auto-detection too..


> > > The question is what other Marvell SOCs have the same PSC1 layout as
> > > kirkwood?
> > 
> > I think marvell,psc1_reset = <>; gives us the most flexibility in
> > accurately describing the hardware.
> Agree, providing psc1_reset value is a good idea to setup the phy
> modes. If all 'orion' SOCs have the PSC1 value then we don't need the
> kirkwood differentiators, especially if things like the reset bit are
> in the same place.
> The same trick Sebastian used to capture the mac address could be used
> to capture the PSC1 value from the bootloader.
> Basically, I think any IP variants that have idential register layouts
> can share a compatible string, otherwise different layouts need
> different compatible strings, so the general format:
>  compatible = "marvell,SOCNAME-eth", "marvell,<something>-eth";
> Seems very sane to me. At least this way if we discover more changes
> then the driver can match on the SOCNAME compatible string to find
> them.

After glancing a LinusW's email, I'm thinking this isn't the correct
path.  I'll write more in my response to him.



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list