On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 04:37:45PM -0700, Tim Harvey wrote: > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 4:58 AM Vladimir Oltean > <vladimir.olt...@nxp.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:25:48AM -0700, Tim Harvey wrote: > > > +/* bind and probe the switch mdios */ > > > +static int mv88e61xx_dsa_probe_mdio(struct udevice *dev) > > > +{ > > > + struct udevice *pdev; > > > + ofnode node, mdios; > > > + const char *name; > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + /* bind phy ports of mdios child node to mv88e61xx_mdio device */ > > > + mdios = dev_read_subnode(dev, "mdios"); > > > + if (ofnode_valid(mdios)) { > > > + ofnode_for_each_subnode(node, mdios) { > > > + name = ofnode_get_name(node); > > > + ret = device_bind_driver_to_node(dev, > > > + "mv88e61xx_mdio", > > > + name, node, &pdev); > > > + if (ret) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "failed to bind %s: %d\n", > > > name, ret); > > > + continue; > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* need to probe it as there is no compatible to do > > > so */ > > > + ret = uclass_get_device_by_ofnode(UCLASS_MDIO, > > > node, &pdev); > > > + if (ret) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "failed to probe %s: %d\n", > > > name, ret); > > > + continue; > > > + } > > > > What do you do with this pdev once you get it? Are you missing a > > device_probe() call? > > Also, why "pdev" and not "dev"? What does the "p" stand for? > > struct udevice *dev is passed into the function so I use pdev to > iterate over the ports in the mdios node so 'pdev' means 'port' here.
Yes, but those under the mdios node aren't ports, they're MDIO controllers, hence my comment. > I do not need to do anything with pdev but I must use > uclass_get_device_by_ofnode() to probe it and that function requires > it. I don't need to call device_probe because > uclass_get_device_by_ofnode does it for me Ok, I didn't notice they all call uclass_get_device_tail() which calls device_probe().