[PATCH v4 3/5] net: ethernet: cpsw: introduce ti,am3352-cpsw compatible string

[Santosh Shilimkar]

On Friday 23 August 2013 10:16 AM, Daniel Mack wrote:
> In order to support features that are specific to the AM335x IP, we have
> to add hardware types and another compatible string.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <zonque at gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt |  3 ++-
>  drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c                 | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++------
>  drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.h                 |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt
> index 4e5ca54..b717458 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/cpsw.txt
> @@ -2,7 +2,8 @@ TI SoC Ethernet Switch Controller Device Tree Bindings
>  ------------------------------------------------------
>  
>  Required properties:
> -- compatible		: Should be "ti,cpsw"
> +- compatible		: Should be "ti,cpsw" for generic cpsw support, or
> +			  "ti,am3352-cpsw" for AM3352 SoCs
>  - reg			: physical base address and size of the cpsw
>  			  registers map.
>  			  An optional third memory region can be supplied if
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> index 7a25ff4..73c44cb6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
> @@ -155,6 +155,11 @@ do {								\
>  		((priv->data.dual_emac) ? priv->emac_port :	\
>  		priv->data.active_slave)
>  
> +enum {
> +	CPSW_TYPE_GENERIC,
> +	CPSW_TYPE_AM33XX
> +};
> +
>  static int debug_level;
>  module_param(debug_level, int, 0);
>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug_level, "cpsw debug level (NETIF_MSG bits)");
> @@ -1692,17 +1697,36 @@ static void cpsw_slave_init(struct cpsw_slave *slave, struct cpsw_priv *priv,
>  	slave->port_vlan = data->dual_emac_res_vlan;
>  }
>  
> +static const struct of_device_id cpsw_of_mtable[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible	= "ti,am3352-cpsw",
I didn't notice this earlier, but can't you use the IP version
as a compatible instead of using a SOC name. Whats really SOC specific
on this IP ? Sorry i have missed any earlier discussion on this but
this approach doesn't seem good. Its like adding SOC checks in the
driver subsystem.

Regards,
Santosh