Hi Marek,
On Sat, 17 Aug 2019 15:50:25 -0400, Vivien Didelot <vivien.dide...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > here is another proposal for supporting setting 2500base-x mode for
> > CPU/DSA ports in device tree correctly.
> >
> > The changes from v1 are that instead of adding .port_setup() and
> > .port_teardown() methods to the DSA operations struct we instead, for
> > CPU/DSA ports, call dsa_port_enable() from dsa_port_setup(), but only
> > after the port is registered (and required phylink/devlink structures
> > exist).
> >
> > The .port_enable/.port_disable methods are now only meant to be used
> > for user ports, when the slave interface is brought up/down. This
> > proposal changes that in such a way that these methods are also called
> > for CPU/DSA ports, but only just after the switch is set up (and just
> > before the switch is tore down).
> >
> > If we went this way, we would have to patch the other DSA drivers to
> > check if user port is being given in their respective .port_enable
> > and .port_disable implmentations.
> >
> > What do you think about this?
>
> This looks much better. Let me pass through all patches of this RFC so that
> I can include bits I would like to see in your next series.
I went ahead and sent a series which enables and disables all ports
in DSA, I hope you don't mind. You can now send a single patch on
top of it focusing on the 2500base-x issue with all the details.
Thank you,
Vivien
