Re: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: ethernet: mediatek: support custom GMAC label

From: Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@public-files.de>
To: linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: "Ilya Lipnitskiy" <ilya.lipnitskiy@gmail.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Felix Fietkau" <nbd@nbd.name>, "John Crispin" <john@phrozen.org>,
	"Sean Wang" <sean.wang@mediatek.com>,
	"Mark Lee" <Mark-MC.Lee@mediatek.com>,
	"Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
	<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
	"René van Dorst" <opensource@vdorst.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] net: ethernet: mediatek: support custom GMAC label
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 18:48:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <278445B7-727F-444D-8F5F-986CAD38BA57@public-files.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAL_JsqKne=ASOyd0E9GakVvDvaXDauHOOU5NgxU8X8ySvyrAcw@mail.gmail.com>

Am 21. April 2021 18:12:41 MESZ schrieb Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>:
>On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 9:05 AM Frank Wunderlich
><frank-w@public-files.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> for dsa slave-ports there is already a property "label", but not for
>master/cpu-ports
>
>Is that because slave ports are external and master are not? If so,
>that makes sense.

In my case gmac is internal,yes...i don't know if ilyas device is similar.

But in a previous kernel-version the gmac of bpi-r2 can be passed through mt7530 switch and gets available external while bypassing dsa core. Here i wanted renaming of this port (gmac1=eth1 mapped as wan-port,while gmac0=eth0 was splitted by dsa switch driver to lan0-lan3)

>Seems like it could be possible to want to distinguish port types for
>reasons other than just what to name the device. Better to describe
>that difference in DT and then base the device name off of that.

Interface names should be not only numbering as they can have different meaning (wan vs. lan).

>If you just want fixed numbering, then 'aliases' node is generally how
>that is done (either because it sneaks in or fatigue from arguing
>fixed /dev nodes are an anti-feature). There's already 'ethernetN'
>which u-boot uses, but the kernel so far does not.

Aliases are not yet used as interface name...do you want this way (use alias name as ifname)? imho we can define multiple aliases to one dt node which is imho not the best way as interface can have only one name, and interface is created feom target node from where the alias needs to be found.

regards Frank

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel