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;
Message-ID: <7b2b2eefb4b7b6ef8ac2a3176286a97b.sboyd@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <20230413210127.s5dkek6adp5ndern@halaney-x13s>
References: <20230413191541.1073027-1-ahalaney@redhat.com> <20230413191541.1073027-4-ahalaney@redhat.com> <a295939f0058373d1caf956749820c0d.sboyd@kernel.org> <20230413210127.s5dkek6adp5ndern@halaney-x13s>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sa8540p-ride: Add ethernet nodes
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, agross@kernel.org,
        andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, mturquette@baylibre.com,
        richardcochran@gmail.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, bmasney@redhat.com, echanude@redhat.com,
        ncai@quicinc.com, jsuraj@qti.qualcomm.com, hisunil@quicinc.com
To:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:05:26 -0700
User-Agent: alot/0.10
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 14:01:27)
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 01:47:19PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Andrew Halaney (2023-04-13 12:15:41)
> > >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++=
++
> > >  1 file changed, 179 insertions(+)
> > >=20
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts b/arch/arm64/b=
oot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > index 40db5aa0803c..650cd54f418e 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sa8540p-ride.dts
> > > @@ -28,6 +28,65 @@ aliases {
> > >         chosen {
> > >                 stdout-path =3D "serial0:115200n8";
> > >         };
> > > +
> > > +       mtl_rx_setup: rx-queues-config {
> >=20
> > Is there a reason why this isn't a child of an ethernet node?
> >=20
> >=20
>=20
> I debated if it was more appropriate to:
>=20
>     1. make a duplicate in each ethernet node (ethernet0/1)
>     2. Put it in one and reference from both
>     3. have it floating around independent like this, similar to what is
>        done in sa8155p-adp.dts[0]
>=20
> I chose 3 as it seemed cleanest, but if there's a good argument for a
> different approach I'm all ears!

I wonder if it allows the binding checker to catch bad properties by
having it under the ethernet node? That's the only thing I can think of
that may be improved, but I'll let binding reviewers comment here.