On Wednesday, November 16, 2016 3:37:15 PM CET Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:26:52PM +0800, Greentime Hu wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 04:43:15PM +0800, Greentime Hu wrote:
> > >> To support device tree usage for ftmac100.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Greentime Hu <green...@gmail.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftmac100.c | 7 +++++++
> > >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftmac100.c
> > >> b/drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftmac100.c
> > >> index dce5f7b..81dd9e1 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftmac100.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/faraday/ftmac100.c
> > >> @@ -1172,11 +1172,17 @@ static int __exit ftmac100_remove(struct
> > >> platform_device *pdev)
> > >> return 0;
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> +static const struct of_device_id mac_of_ids[] = {
> > >> + { .compatible = "andestech,atmac100" },
> > >> + { }
> > >
> > > andestech is not in
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/vendor-prefixes.txt Please provide a
> > > separate patch adding it.
> > OK. I will provide another patch to add andestech.
> >
> > > Humm, why andestech? Why not something based around faraday
> > > technology?
> > It is because we use the same ftmac100 IP provided from faraday
> > technology but I am now using it in andestech SoC.
>
> Please make sure you get an acked-by: from the device tree
> maintainers. They might want you to use faraday, since that is the
> original IP provider. For example, all Synopsys licensed IP uses
> "snps,XXX", not the SoC vendor with the license.
I think ideally we have both the ID from andes and from faraday here.
Note that we already have "moxa,moxart-mac" as a compatible string
for this hardware, though it uses a different driver.
We should probably have a single binding document describing
both compatible strings and any optional properties.
Arnd
