Hello Scott,
On 07/31/2014 12:28 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 23:35 -0500, Emil Medve wrote:
>> Hello Scott,
>>
>>
>> On 07/30/2014 09:30 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 16:52 -0500, Emil Medve wrote:
>>>>>>>> + mdio0: mdio <at> fc000 {
>>>>>>>> + };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why is the empty node needed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For the label
>>>>>
>>>>> For mdio-parent-bus, or is there some other dts layer that makes this
>>>>> node non-empty?
>>>>
>>>> 'powerpc/corenet: Create the dts components for the DPAA FMan' -
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/370872
>>>
>>> Why does this patch define the mdio0 label for mdio@e1120, but not
>>> define a label for any other node?
>>
>> Only MDIO controllers that are pinned out have these labels. Only pinned
>> out MDIO(s) are capable of controlling external PHY(s) via these board
>> level MDIO buses
>
> Is there any reason to describe non-pinned-out MDIO controllers at all?
Yes. For the internal TBI PHY(s). Each MAC supporting SGMII has a TBI
PHY that is attached to the MDIO controller of the respective MAC
> Is the lack of pinning out inherent to the silicon, or is it board
> design/config?
It's a silicon level decision
> Is the answer different for different MDIO controllers?
You mean non-FSL MDIO controllers? Dunno. All FSL SoC have the same MDIO
pin-out decision
> I'm just curious why mdio@e1120 is labelled in a non-board dtsi while
> others are labelled elsewhere.
Labels are relevant only in the context of 'powerpc/corenet: Add MDIO
bus muxing support to the board device tree(s)' -
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/370866. Most labels are created and
used in the board .dts file except b4qds.dtsi which is shared between
b4420qds.dts and b4860qds.dts
Cheers,
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
