[PATCH 1/1] net/fec: iMX53 needs gasket for both MII and RMII

[Shawn Guo]

On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:49:16AM -0700, Troy Kisky wrote:
> On 6/30/2011 9:19 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > Hi Troy,
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 03:38:18PM -0700, Troy Kisky wrote:
> >> Currently, only RMII interfaces are using the gasket.
> >> But, the iMX53 needs to enable the gasket for MII
> >> mode as well. The iMX51 has no gasket registers. So,
> >> add a use_gasket field to fec_platform_data to not restrict
> >> same kernel for both iMX51/53 boards.
> >>
> > 
> > Right, on those early SoCs with fec, like imx27/35/51, there is no
> > gasket, while on those recent ones, like imx25/50/53, there is gasket,
> > and the gasket should be enabled for not only MII mode but also  RMII
> > mode.  I guess you caught this problem when using a MII phy with
> > imx53?
> > 
> > Though I agree this is something we need to fix, I'm unsure using
> > platform_data is the best way.  IMO, this gasket is rather SoC
> > specific thing than platform (board).  If we are running fec on
> > imx25/50/53, we need to enable the gasket, no matter what boards
> > we are using and how the boards are designed.
> > 
> > Since platform_device_id is already being used to distinguish imx28
> > from other imx SoCs, maybe we can extend it to handle gasket too?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Shawn
> > 
> >> iMX28 boards don't need use_gasket, as they have
> >> FEC_QUIRK_ENET_MAC.
> 
> When I saw how FEC_QUIRK_ENET_MAC was handled, it thought about changing
> to do it that way. It really does look better that way. But the current
> change looks more efficient memory-wise. Though, I guess that would
> depend on how many boards your kernel supports and whether more option
> are to be added later.
> 
> I'm fine with redoing your way if I can get a tentative OK first.
> 
> Is	.name = 'g-fec' OK?
> 
No.  Let code talk.  I just sent a patch with double sign-off (you
and me).  Please take a look.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn