Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 3/3] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: setup SERDES irq also for CPU/DSA ports

[Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>]

Hi Marek,

On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 19:05:20 +0200, Marek Behun <marek.behun@nic.cz> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 12:25:52 -0400
> Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > So now we have mv88e6xxx_setup_port() and mv88e6xxx_port_setup(), which both
> > setup a port, differently, at different time. This is definitely error prone.
> 
> Hmm. I don't know how much of mv88e6xxx_setup_port() could be moved to
> this new port_setup(), since there are other setup functions called in
> mv88e6xxx_setup() that can possibly depend on what was done by
> mv88e6xxx_setup_port().
> 
> Maybe the new DSA operations should be called .after_setup()
> and .before_teardown(), and be called just once for the whole switch,
> not for each port?

I think the DSA switch port_setup/port_teardown operations are fine, but the
idea would be that the drivers must no longer setup their ports directly
in their .setup function. So for mv88e6xxx precisely, we should rename
mv88e6xxx_setup_port to mv88e6xxx_port_setup, and move all the port-related
code from mv88e6xxx_setup into mv88e6xxx_port_setup.

Also, the DSA stack must call ds->ops->port_setup() for all ports, regardless
their type, i.e. even if their are unused.

As a reminder, *setup/*teardown are more like typical probe/remove callbacks
found in drivers, while enable/disable are a runtime thing, switching a port
on and off (think ifconfig up/down).


Thanks,

	Vivien