On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 9:47 AM Fabio Estevam <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 1:25 PM Fabio Estevam <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Tim, > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 12:26 PM Tim Harvey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Fabio, > > > > > > Thanks for testing this. I'll submit a v5 shortly with your rb tag and > > > support for 6320: > > > > Thanks for including the 6320 model! > > > > > Was there an error path you found in drivers/net/mv88e6xxx.c that > > > should print an error to explain a failed probe for better future > > > troubleshooting or was that failure somewhere else? It sounds like > > I forgot to reply to this one. Yes, it would help if we print an error like > this: > > --- a/drivers/net/mv88e6xxx.c > +++ b/drivers/net/mv88e6xxx.c > @@ -410,8 +410,10 @@ static int mv88e6xxx_get_switch_id(struct udevice *dev) > int res; > > res = mv88e6xxx_port_read(dev, 0, PORT_REG_SWITCH_ID); > - if (res < 0) > + if (res < 0) { > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to read switch ID: %d\n", res); > return res; > + } > return res & 0xfff0; > } > > Thanks
Fabio, I just sent a v5 before seeing this. I think all we are waiting for on this series is for Vladimir to ok the dt changes as I believe I have finally done the right thing there now. If I need to do a v6 I'll add this in, otherwise I'll send it after it gets accepted and merged. Best Regards, Tim
