Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-49641-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <65bbd2ce.050a0220.5ff09.69d5@mx.google.com>
References: <20240201151747.7524-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com> <20240201151747.7524-3-ansuelsmth@gmail.com> <170680473689.4979.1991415008659281513@kwain> <65bbd2ce.050a0220.5ff09.69d5@mx.google.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 2/9] net: phy: add support for scanning PHY in PHY packages nodes
From: Antoine Tenart <atenart@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, 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
To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 11:05:59 +0100
Message-ID: <170686835980.5216.5174621768810456847@kwain>

Quoting Christian Marangi (2024-02-01 18:20:10)
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote:
> > Quoting Christian Marangi (2024-02-01 16:17:28)
> > > +
> > > +                       rc =3D __of_mdiobus_parse_phys(mdio, child, a=
ddr, scanphys);
> >=20
> > You might want to save passing scanphys down, PHYs w/o a reg property in
> > a PHY package won't be "auto scanned" later.
>=20
> I might be confused by this, but isn't this already done? (passing
> scanphys in each recursive call so we can set it to true if needed?)
>=20
> Also I think the scanphys should be skipped for the PHY package
> (assuming we make reg mandatory, it would be an error condition and
> should not be handled?)

Sorry if that wasn't clear, this is what I meant. scanphys doesn't need
to be set to true in a PHY package (both if we want reg to be mandatory
there and because my understanding of the auto-scan code is PHYs in a
PHY package won't be auto scanned anyway).

Thanks,
Antoine