From: Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2020 19:48:23 +0300
> Although we can detect the chip revision 100% at runtime, it is useful > to specify it in the device tree compatible string too, because > otherwise there would be no way to assess the correctness of device tree > bindings statically, without booting a board (only some switch versions > have internal RGMII delays and/or an SGMII port). > > But for testing the P/Q/R/S support, what I have is a reworked board > with the SJA1105T replaced by a pin-compatible SJA1105Q, and I don't > want to keep a separate device tree blob just for this one-off board. > Since just the chip has been replaced, its RGMII delay setup is > inherently the same (meaning: delays added by the PHY on the slave > ports, and by PCB traces on the fixed-link CPU port). > > For this board, I'd rather have the driver shout at me, but go ahead and > use what it found even if it doesn't match what it's been told is there. > > [ 2.970826] sja1105 spi0.1: Device tree specifies chip SJA1105T but found > SJA1105Q, please fix it! > [ 2.980010] sja1105 spi0.1: Probed switch chip: SJA1105Q > [ 3.005082] sja1105 spi0.1: Enabled switch tagging > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> Applied.
