[U-Boot] [EXT] Re: Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementaion?

[Simon Glass]

Hi Ken,

On 26 December 2017 at 03:38, Ken Ma <make at marvell.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon & Joe
>
> I've cc the mail, thanks!
>
> BTW, I've implemented Marvell MDIO in plain MDIO APIs as other vendors.
>
> Thanks a lot for your kind help!
> Yours,
> Ken
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sjg at google.com [mailto:sjg at google.com] On Behalf Of Simon Glass
> Sent: 2017年12月22日 1:19
> To: Ken Ma
> Cc: joe.hershberger at gmail.com; Wilson Ding; Nadav Haklai; Hua Jing; Victor Gu; Igal Liberman; Stefan Chulski; Stefan Roese
> Subject: [EXT] Re: Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementaion?
>
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi,
>
> Please can you cc the mailing list for U-Boot things?
>
> Regards,
> Simon
>
>
> On 20 December 2017 at 23:55, Ken Ma <make at marvell.com> wrote:
>> Dear Joe and Simon
>>
>> Excuse me.
>>
>> U-boot v2018 doesn’t have the MDIO support for Armada SoCs(MDIO function is implemented in net driver - MVPP2 and NETA).
>>
>> We need an unified Marvell MDIO driver for both SMI and XSMI and for
>> both MVPP2 and NETA, the driver can handle complicated mux of PHY and MDIO bus across different CP module (for example, in a8k MC boards CP1 ETH0 are connected PHY8 of CP0 XMDIO, CP1 and CP0 are in different address ranges).
>>
>> Now there is no MDIO U-CLASS driver and no MDIO U-CLASS id in u-boot 2018, other vendors implement their MDIO drivers in plain APIs.
>>
>> My question is whether we should implement MDIO driver in U-CLASS DM model(in this case, mdio-uclass driver needs to be added).
>>
>> Or is it OK to just provide plain MDIO APIs as other vendors in our Marvell MDIO driver?
>>
>> Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementation?
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot for your kind help!
>>
>> Yours,
>> Ken
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stefan Roese [mailto:sr at denx.de]
>> Sent: 2017年12月21日 14:03
>> To: Ken Ma
>> Cc: Wilson Ding; Nadav Haklai; Hua Jing; Victor Gu; Igal Liberman;
>> Stefan Chulski
>> Subject: Re: Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementaion?
>>
>> Hi Ken,
>>
>> On 19.12.2017 10:42, Ken Ma wrote:
>>> Hi Stefan
>>>
>>> Excuse me.
>>>
>>> U-boot v2018 doesn’t have the MDIO support for Armada SoCs(MDIO
>>> function is implemented in net driver - MVPP2 and NETA),
>>>
>>> we need an unified Marvell MDIO driver for both SMI and XSMI, the
>>> driver can handle complicated mux of PHY and MDIO bus across
>>> different CP modules
>>>
>>> (for example, in a8k MC boards CP1 ETH0 are connected PHY8 of CP0 XMDIO).
>>>
>>> Now there is no MDIO U-CLASS driver and no MDIO U-CLASS id in u-boot
>>> 2017, other vendors implement their MDIO driver in plain APIs.
>>>
>>> Our question is whether we should implement MDIO driver in U-CLASS DM
>>> model(in this case, mdio-uclass driver needs to be added).
>>>
>>> Or is it OK to just provide plain MDIO APIs as other vendors in our
>>> Marvell MDIO driver?
>>>
>>> Would you please give some advice on our MDIO driver implementation?
>>
>> Implementing a MDIO UCLASS driver would be preferred - at least this is my first feeling about this. But frankly, I can't decide this. You can either implement your MDIO / PHY interface in the "normal, plain" APIs and send it to the list for review and upstream acceptance. But you are correct, that you might receive comments about using DM with a new MDIO UCLASS for this. So perhaps its best if you send a mail to the list to ask about this before implementing it without DM support.
>> Please add Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at gmail.com> (net custodian) and Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> (DM custodian) to Cc, if you decide to check on the list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stefan
>>

Yes this should use driver model. We are likely to start removing
non-DM in 2018 - e,g. boards that don't use CONFIG_BLK will start
being removed after April, I think.

Regards,
Simon