[RFC PATCH v2 net-next 02/14] net: dsa: mt7530: fix phylink for port 5 and fix port 5 modes

[Arınç ÜNAL]

On 11.04.2023 18:00, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 04:46:14PM +0300, arinc9.unal at gmail.com wrote:
>> From: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal at arinc9.com>
>>
>> There're two code paths for setting up port 5:
>>
>> mt7530_setup()
>> -> mt7530_setup_port5()
>>
>> mt753x_phylink_mac_config()
>> -> mt753x_mac_config()
>>     -> mt7530_mac_config()
>>        -> mt7530_setup_port5()
>>
>> The first code path is supposed to run when PHY muxing is being used. In
>> this case, port 5 is somewhat of a hidden port. It won't be defined on the
>> devicetree so phylink can't be used to manage the port.
>>
>> The second code path used to call mt7530_setup_port5() directly under case
>> 5 on mt7530_phylink_mac_config() before it was moved to mt7530_mac_config()
>> with 88bdef8be9f6 ("net: dsa: mt7530: Extend device data ready for adding a
>> new hardware"). mt7530_setup_port5() will never run through this code path
>> because the current code on mt7530_setup() bypasses phylink for all cases
>> of port 5.
>>
>> Fix this by leaving it to phylink if port 5 is used as a CPU, DSA, or user
>> port. For the cases of PHY muxing or the port being disabled, call
>> mt7530_setup_port5() directly from mt7530_setup() without involving
>> phylink.
>>
>> Move setting the interface and P5_DISABLED mode to a more specific
>> location. They're supposed to be overwritten if PHY muxing is detected.
>>
>> Add comments which explain the process.
>>
>> Tested-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal at arinc9.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal at arinc9.com>
>> ---
> 
> We have a natural language processing engine (AUTOSEL) which
> automatically picks up as candidates for "stable" those patches which
> weren't explicitly submitted through the proper process for that (and
> they contain words like "fix", "bug", "crash", "leak" etc).
> 
> Your chosen wording, both in the commit title and message, would most
> likely trigger that bot, and then you'd have to explain why you chose
> this language and not something else more descriptive of your change.
> It would be nice if you could rewrite the commit messages for your
> entire series to be a bit more succint as to what is the purpose of the
> change you are making, and don't use the word "fix" when there is no
> problem to be observed.

Will do, thanks.

Arınç