Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-49042-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 02:02:41 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
Cc: Antoine Tenart <atenart@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Robert Marko <robert.marko@sartura.hr>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 2/9] net: phy: add support for scanning PHY
 in PHY packages nodes
Message-ID: <2bba44dc-b5df-46ef-b5f3-eabbd34aa7db@lunn.ch>
References: <20240201151747.7524-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <20240201151747.7524-3-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <170680473689.4979.1991415008659281513@kwain>
 <65bbd2ce.050a0220.5ff09.69d5@mx.google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <65bbd2ce.050a0220.5ff09.69d5@mx.google.com>

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 06:20:10PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote:
> > Quoting Christian Marangi (2024-02-01 16:17:28)
> > > 
> > > +static int __of_mdiobus_parse_phys(struct mii_bus *mdio, struct device_node *np,
> > > +                                  int base_addr, bool *scanphys)
> > > +{
> > > +       struct device_node *child;
> > > +       int addr, rc = 0;
> > > +
> > > +       /* Loop over the child nodes and register a phy_device for each phy */
> > > +       for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child) {
> > > +               if (of_node_name_eq(child, "ethernet-phy-package")) {
> > > +                       rc = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &addr);
> > > +                       if (rc)
> > > +                               goto exit;
> > 
> > This means a PHY package node w/o a reg property will prevent all other
> > PHYs in the same parent node to be found?
> >
> 
> Since this is something new, would it be a problem to make it mandatory
> to define a reg? (And return error if we find something? Or print a
> warn?)

Making reg mandatory within a package is reasonable. Please indicate
this in the DT schema.

     Andrew