Hello Yuiko Oshino, On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 09:22:43AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 11:07:45PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > On Thu, May 09, 2019 at 10:55:29PM +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > > On 09.05.2019 22:29, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > > I have a board here that has a KSZ8051MLL (datasheet: > > > > http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/ksz8051mll.pdf, phyid: > > > > 0x0022155x) assembled. The actual phyid is 0x00221556. > > > > > > I think the datasheets are the source of the confusion. If the > > > datasheets for different chips list 0x0022155x as PHYID each, and > > > authors of support for additional chips don't check the existing code, > > > then happens what happened. > > > > > > However it's not a rare exception and not Microchip-specific that > > > sometimes vendors use the same PHYID for different chips. > > From the vendor's POV it is even sensible to reuse the phy IDs iff the > chips are "compatible". > > Assuming that the last nibble of the phy ID actually helps to > distinguish the different (not completely) compatible chips, we need > some more detailed information than available in the data sheets I have. > There is one person in the recipents of this mail with an @microchip.com > address (hint, hint!).
can you give some input here or forward to a person who can? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
