[PATCH 1/2] ARM: mvebu: change order of ethernet DT nodes on Armada 38x

From: kaloz@openwrt.org (Imre Kaloz)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: mvebu: change order of ethernet DT nodes on Armada 38x
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 20:02:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <op.ydcptvss2s3iss@ecaz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160224184114.GB2292@1wt.eu>

On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 19:41:14 +0100, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> Hi Russell,
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 11:48:53AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 08:45:12PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 07:31:44PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux  
>> wrote:
>> > (...)
>> > > > For example, on the Armada 388 GP, the board has two ports,  
>> labelled
>> > > > GE0 and GE1. One has to know that GE0 is eth1 and GE1 is eth0,  
>> which
>> > > > isn't really obvious.
>> > > >
>> > > > In order to solve this, this patch proposes to exceptionaly  
>> violate
>> > > > the rule of "order DT nodes by register address", and put the  
>> 0x70000
>> > > > node before the 0x30000 node, so that network interfaces get  
>> named in
>> > > > a more natural way.
>> > >
>> > > The danger is that this will completely mess up people's existing
>> > > scripts/distro configuration which are now used to the current
>> > > labelling of the network ports.
>> > >
>> > > Not every distro provides a sane way to deal with this...
>> >
>> > Well, may be that's one more reason for fixing it before boards start  
>> to
>> > ship and run distro kernels. If some boards are already in the wild  
>> running
>> > on a BSP kernel, people will complain that mainline reorders their  
>> network
>> > ports and will stick to the BSP kernel instead.
>>
>> I've checked, and we believe not many people are using mainline kernels
>> on clearfog.  I'll have to adjust my debian jessie setup to fix the
>> resulting carnage though.  On the plus side, it means that mainline
>> matches Marvell's kernel for interface naming.
>
> Well, now I'm one of these and I confirm that it's really painful to
> have a different ordering between the DTB provided in mainline and the
> DTB provided with the board. The worst thing is that using mainline,
> eth0 corresponds to the switch and appears up, so you don't immediately
> realize that it's not where your cable is connected :-/
>
> Thus could we please get Thomas' patch to ensure that the board boots
> with similar interface naming with both the original and mainline kernel  
> ?

Shouldn't this change be device specific then instead of messing up the  
dtsi?

Cheers,

Imre