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:   Mon, 12 Sep 2022 17:26:11 +0800
From:   Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        Li Yang <leoyang.li@nxp.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH devicetree] arm64: dts: ls1028a-rdb: add more ethernet
 aliases
Message-ID: <20220912092611.GW1728671@dragon>
References: <20220905212458.1549179-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220905212458.1549179-1-vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 12:24:58AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Commit "arm64: dts: ls1028a: enable swp5 and eno3 for all boards" which
> Shawn declared as applied, but for which I can't find a sha1sum, has
> enabled a new Ethernet port on the LS1028A-RDB (&enetc_port3), but
> U-Boot, which passes a MAC address to Linux' device tree through the
> /aliases node, fails to do this for this newly enabled port.
> 
> Fix that by adding more ethernet aliases in the only
> backwards-compatible way possible: at the end of the current list.
> 
> And since it is possible to very easily convert either swp4 or swp5 to
> DSA user ports now (which have a MAC address of their own), using these
> U-Boot commands:
> 
> => fdt addr $fdt_addr_r
> => fdt rm /soc/pcie@1f0000000/ethernet-switch@0,5/ports/port@4 ethernet
> 
> it would be good if those DSA user ports (swp4, swp5) gained a valid MAC
> address from U-Boot as well. In order for that to work properly,
> provision two more ethernet aliases for &mscc_felix_port{4,5} as well.
> 
> The resulting ordering is slightly unusual, but to me looks more natural
> than eno0, eno2, swp0, swp1, swp2, swp3, eno3, swp4, swp5.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>

Applied, thanks!