Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 5 Jul 2022 20:57:45 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     "Pandey, Radhey Shyam" <radhey.shyam.pandey@amd.com>
Cc:     "nicolas.ferre@microchip.com" <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
        "claudiu.beznea@microchip.com" <claudiu.beznea@microchip.com>,
        "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
        "kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "hkallweit1@gmail.com" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
        "linux@armlinux.org.uk" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "saravanak@google.com" <saravanak@google.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "git (AMD-Xilinx)" <git@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: macb: In shared MDIO usecase make MDIO
 producer ethernet node to probe first
Message-ID: <YsSJqb9pPFcrIvrU@lunn.ch>
References: <1656618906-29881-1-git-send-email-radhey.shyam.pandey@amd.com>
 <Yr66xEMB/ORr0Xcp@lunn.ch>
 <MN0PR12MB59531DFD084FA947084D91B6B7819@MN0PR12MB5953.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <MN0PR12MB59531DFD084FA947084D91B6B7819@MN0PR12MB5953.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

> Thanks for the review.  I want to get your thoughts on the outline of
> the generic solution. Is the current approach fine and we can extend it
> for all shared MDIO use cases/ or do we see any limitations?
>  
> a) Figure out if the MDIO bus is shared.  (new binding or reuse existing)
> b) If the MDIO bus is shared based on DT property then figure out if the 
> MDIO producer platform device is probed. If not, defer MDIO consumer
> MDIO bus registration.

I actually think you need to talk to the core device model people and
those who support suspend/resume.

It seems like there should be a way to declare a dependency, probably
a probe time, so the core will just do the right things. I don't see
why MDIO busses should be the first to have this problem, so i expect
there already exists a solution.

	Andrew