* Andrew Lunn <[email protected]> [180808 12:02]:
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt
> > @@ -19,6 +19,9 @@ Required properties:
> > - slaves : Specifies number for slaves
> > - active_slave : Specifies the slave to use for time stamping,
> > ethtool and SIOCGMIIPHY
> > +- cpsw-phy-sel : Specifies the phandle to the CPSW phy mode
> > selection
> > + device. Note that in legacy cases cpsw-phy-sel may be
> > + a child device instead of a phandle.
>
> Hi Tony
>
> It would be good to reference cpsw-phy-sel.txt.
OK will add.
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw-phy-sel.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw-phy-sel.c
> > @@ -170,10 +170,13 @@ void cpsw_phy_sel(struct device *dev, phy_interface_t
> > phy_mode, int slave)
> > struct device_node *node;
> > struct cpsw_phy_sel_priv *priv;
> >
> > - node = of_get_child_by_name(dev->of_node, "cpsw-phy-sel");
> > + node = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "cpsw-phy-sel", 0);
> > if (!node) {
>
> Do you need to handle EPROBE_DEFER here? The phandle points to a
> device which has not yet been loaded? I'm not sure exactly where it
> will be returned, maybe it is bus_find_device(), but i expect to see
> some handling of it somewhere in this function.
With the proper interconnect hierarchy in the device tree there should be
no EPROBE_DEFER happening here as the interconnects are probed in the
right order with the always on interrupt with system control module first :)
But then again, adding support for EPROBE_DEFER here won't hurt either,
will take a look.
Regards,
Tony
