2013.01.06. 23:10 keltezéssel, Michel Stempin írta: <...> >>> But it looks like the default for id 0 in ath79_register_eth(id) is to set >>> bit 4 in mask, which is wrong if we swap PHY 0 and 4, is it? >> >> Erm, the 'false, false' in the phy4_switch call above ensures that we don't >> swap >> the phy address. It was 'false, true' in the original patch. > > Oh, yes, so BIT(0) is only required if 'false, true' is used, all right!
Yes. <...> >> First of all, the built-in switch has no MAC5 interface, the datasheet is >> simply >> wrong about that IMHO. > > An MII (or GMII) interface connects a MAC to a PHY or a MAC to a MAC in > Reversed MII configuration, so actually, I think there is a MAC indeed on the > CPU side of GE0, which I guess they called MAC5, and I bet for MAC6 for the > one > on the CPU side of GE1... But I agree that the datasheet is not clear about > it, > and it is not mentioned anywhere else. The SoC has two ethernet MACs which are GE0 and GE1 (aka. GMAC0 and GMAC1), and the built-in switch has five MACs. <...> >> The original patch clears the PHY_SWAP bit and sets the PHY_ADDR_SWAP bit. So >> MAC1 of the siwtch will be connected to PHY0 and GE0 will be connected to >> PHY4. >> Because the PHY_ADDR_SWAP bit is still set, the PHY4 of the switch uses phy >> address 0 and that is the reason why you had to change the default phy_mask >> as >> well. The connection type of GE0 and GE1 interfaces are not changed by the >> patch. > > So basically if I understand you correctly, both configs with: > - PHY_SWAP=false, PHY_ADDR_SWAP=true, phy_mask=BIT(0) on one hand and > - PHY_SWAP=false, PHY_ADDR_SWAP=false, phy_mask=BIT(4) (default) on the > other hand > are equivalent? Yes. At least on devices which has only one ethernet port connected to GE0. > Then what do you suggest: > - apply the more complex TL-MR3020/TL-MR3040/TL-MR11U existing patch to > TL-WR703N for consistency as I originally proposed > - apply your simpler solution to all > - or just apply your solution to TL-WR703N only and not being consistent > with others? I have applied the simpler solution to all boards. > Anyway, thank you for these explanations! You are welcome! -Gabor _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
