Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 5/7] net: dsa: avoid DT validation for drivers which provide default config

From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 20:09:12 +0000

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 07:51:22PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 12:00:16PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > When a DSA driver (e.g. mv88e6xxx) provides a default configuration,
> > avoid validating the DT description as missing elements will be
> > provided by the DSA driver.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <[email-masked]>
> > ---
> >  net/dsa/port.c | 3 +++
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/net/dsa/port.c b/net/dsa/port.c
> > index c30e3a7d2145..23d9970c02d3 100644
> > --- a/net/dsa/port.c
> > +++ b/net/dsa/port.c
> > @@ -1951,6 +1951,9 @@ static void dsa_shared_port_validate_of(struct dsa_port *dp,
> >  	*missing_phy_mode = false;
> >  	*missing_link_description = false;
> >  
> > +	if (dp->ds->ops->port_get_fwnode)
> > +		return;
> 
> I wounder if you should actually call it for the given port, and
> ensure it does not return -EOPNOTSUPP, or -EINVAL, etc, because it is
> not going to override that port? Then the DT values should be
> validated?

Won't that mean that we need to implement the method for all DSA
drivers?

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!