Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753278AbdHXNjd (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:39:33 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([178.209.37.122]:42966 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751886AbdHXNja (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:39:30 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:39:22 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Antoine Tenart Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kishon@ti.com, jason@lakedaemon.net, sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com, gregory.clement@free-electrons.com, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com, nadavh@marvell.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mw@semihalf.com, stefanc@marvell.com, miquel.raynal@free-electrons.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 02/13] phy: add the mvebu cp110 comphy driver Message-ID: <20170824133922.GC8022@lunn.ch> References: <20170824083823.16826-1-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> <20170824083823.16826-3-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170824083823.16826-3-antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1131 Lines: 30 > +static const struct mvebu_comhy_conf mvebu_comphy_modes[] = { > + /* lane 0 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(0, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1), > + /* lane 1 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(1, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1), > + /* lane 2 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1), > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(2, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x1), > + /* lane 3 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(3, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2), > + /* lane 4 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x2), > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 0, PHY_MODE_10GKR, 0x2), > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(4, 1, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1), > + /* lane 5 */ > + MVEBU_COMPHY_CONF(5, 2, PHY_MODE_SGMII, 0x1), > +}; Do other Marvell SoCs re-use this IP? Maybe add cp110 to the name here to indicate what SoC this configuration belongs to? I guess at some point, the compatible string will be used to select the correct table for the hardware variant. > +static const struct of_device_id mvebu_comphy_of_match_table[] = { > + { .compatible = "marvell,comphy-cp110" }, Is that specific enough? It seems like this table is easy to change in the VHDL. Could there be another cp110 with a different configuration? Andrew