> Thank you very much for your hints. Yes that works indeed too. I
> just assumed it was intended to work automatically with the
> built-in phys as it does with the other switches I am using.
Hi Marcel
The basic assumption is there is a one to one mapping of port number
to PHY address. All the o
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 08:31:22PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:27:16AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > On 2/20/19 10:15 AM, Marcel Reichmuth wrote:
> >
> > You are supposed to describe the port to PHY mapping using the binding,
> > so for instance:
> >
> > ports {
>
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:27:16AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 2/20/19 10:15 AM, Marcel Reichmuth wrote:
> > When phys do not start at address 0 like on the mv88e6341 the wrong
> > phy address is used and therefore the slave ports can not be
> > initialized. This patch adds the proper offse
On 2/20/19 10:15 AM, Marcel Reichmuth wrote:
> When phys do not start at address 0 like on the mv88e6341 the wrong
> phy address is used and therefore the slave ports can not be
> initialized. This patch adds the proper offset to the phy address.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcel Reichmuth
You are suppo
When phys do not start at address 0 like on the mv88e6341 the wrong
phy address is used and therefore the slave ports can not be
initialized. This patch adds the proper offset to the phy address.
Signed-off-by: Marcel Reichmuth
---
drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6xxx/chip.c | 3 +++
include/net/dsa.h
