[PATCH v2] dm: uclass: don't assign aliased seq numbers

[Simon Glass]

Hi Michael,

On Fri, 20 Dec 2019 at 06:29, Michael Walle <michael at walle.cc> wrote:
>
> If there are aliases for an uclass, set the base for the "dynamically"
> allocated numbers next to the highest alias.
>
> Please note, that this might lead to holes in the sequences, depending
> on the device tree. For example if there is only an alias "ethernet1",
> the next device seq number would be 2.
>
> In particular this fixes a problem with boards which are using ethernet
> aliases but also might have network add-in cards like the E1000. If the
> board is started with the add-in card and depending on the order of the
> drivers, the E1000 might occupy the first ethernet device and mess up
> all the hardware addresses, because the devices are now shifted by one.
>
> Cc: Thomas Fitzsimmons <fitzsim at fitzsim.org>
> Cc: Michal Simek <michal.simek at xilinx.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael at walle.cc>
> Reviewed-by: Alex Marginean <alexandru.marginean at nxp.com>
> Tested-by: Alex Marginean <alexandru.marginean at nxp.com>
> Acked-by: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv at gmail.com>
> ---
>
> As a side effect, this should also make the following commits
> superfluous:
>  - 7f3289bf6d ("dm: device: Request next sequence number")
>  - 61607225d1 ("i2c: Fill req_seq in i2c_post_bind()")
>    Although I don't understand the root cause of the said problem.
>
> Thomas, Michal, could you please test this and then I'd add a second
> patch removing the old code.

I think this is reasonable. We have discussed a possible rework of the
logic to merge seq and req_seq, but I don't think we have any patches
yet.

Please can you add a test to your patch? You can put it in test-fdt.c
for example.

If you are reverting the other patches, could you please send patches for those?

Regards,
SImon