Message ID | 20170818040447.ddz27hm3c2eashjr@wens.csie.org |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> wrote: > Hi Arnd, Olof, > > This is the second batch of fixes for 4.13. This is based on the first > batch of fixes that was already merged. Pulled into fixes, thanks! > We still have some device tree binding changes for the H3 EMAC and > integrated Ethernet PHY we need to sort out for 4.13. If it is not > done by next week, I will send out revert patches for the driver, > device tree binding, and device tree changes. Or is this cutting > it too close and we should just revert them now? I need more information about the specific change to answer that. Can you point me to the patches in question? Arnd
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 5:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> wrote: >> Hi Arnd, Olof, >> >> This is the second batch of fixes for 4.13. This is based on the first >> batch of fixes that was already merged. > > Pulled into fixes, thanks! > >> We still have some device tree binding changes for the H3 EMAC and >> integrated Ethernet PHY we need to sort out for 4.13. If it is not >> done by next week, I will send out revert patches for the driver, >> device tree binding, and device tree changes. Or is this cutting >> it too close and we should just revert them now? > > I need more information about the specific change to answer that. The hardware in question has an integrated PHY in the SoC, but can also choose to use an external PHY. The changes would address two issues: a) how to differentiate internal vs external PHY in the device tree, and b) avoiding confusion when both are present and assigned the same address (there is a mux in the hardware). > Can you point me to the patches in question? Here's v2 (which is not final): https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg601325.html Rob also chimed in on related patches: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg601482.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg190976.html ChenYu
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 5:58 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> wrote: >>> Hi Arnd, Olof, >>> >>> This is the second batch of fixes for 4.13. This is based on the first >>> batch of fixes that was already merged. >> >> Pulled into fixes, thanks! >> >>> We still have some device tree binding changes for the H3 EMAC and >>> integrated Ethernet PHY we need to sort out for 4.13. If it is not >>> done by next week, I will send out revert patches for the driver, >>> device tree binding, and device tree changes. Or is this cutting >>> it too close and we should just revert them now? >> >> I need more information about the specific change to answer that. > > The hardware in question has an integrated PHY in the SoC, but can > also choose to use an external PHY. The changes would address two > issues: a) how to differentiate internal vs external PHY in the > device tree, and b) avoiding confusion when both are present and > assigned the same address (there is a mux in the hardware). > >> Can you point me to the patches in question? > > Here's v2 (which is not final): > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg601325.html > > Rob also chimed in on related patches: > > https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg601482.html > https://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg190976.html Ok, it sounds like you are closing in on the final solution now, If we get agreement on the fixes by next week, that should be fine. Arnd