[PATCH v3 3/3] ramips: mt7621-dts: add pinctrl properties for ethernet
Sander Vanheule
sander at svanheule.net
Sun Feb 13 06:14:38 PST 2022
On Sun, 2022-02-13 at 16:06 +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> Hey Sander,
>
> On 13/02/2022 15:31, Sander Vanheule wrote:
> > Hi Arınç,
> >
> > On Sun, 2022-02-13 at 11:15 +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
> > > Add the missing pinctrl properties on the ethernet node.
> > > GMAC1 will start working with this change.
> > >
> > > Link:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/83a35aa3-6cb8-2bc4-2ff4-64278bbcd8c8@arinc9.com/
> > >
> > > Overwrite pinctrl-0 property without rgmii2_pins on devicetrees which use
> > > the rgmii2 pins as GPIO (22 - 33).
> > >
> > > Add rgmii2 pin group to gpio function on mt7621_tplink_archer-x6-v3.dtsi
> > > which uses GPIO 28.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal at arinc9.com>
> > > ---
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621.dtsi | 3 +++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_alfa-network_quad-e4g.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_buffalo_wsr-1166dhp.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_buffalo_wsr-600dhp.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_d-team_pbr-m1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_firefly_firewrt.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_gnubee_gb-pc1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_gnubee_gb-pc2.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_mediatek_ap-mt7621a-v60.dts | 4 ++++
> > > .../linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_mediatek_mt7621-eval-board.dts | 4 ++++
> > > .../linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_mikrotik_routerboard-m11g.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_mtc_wr1201.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_netgear_ex6150.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_sercomm_na502.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_telco-electronics_x1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_tplink_archer-x6-v3.dtsi | 6 +++++-
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_tplink_re350-v1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_tplink_rexx0-v1.dtsi | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_ubnt_edgerouter-x.dtsi | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_wavlink_wl-wn531a6.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_wevo_w2914ns-v2.dtsi | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_winstars_ws-wn583a6.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_xzwifi_creativebox-v1.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_zbtlink_zbt-wg1602.dtsi | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_zbtlink_zbt-wg2626.dts | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_zbtlink_zbt-wg3526.dtsi | 4 ++++
> > > target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621_zyxel_nr7101.dts | 4 ++++
> > > 27 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> >
> > Are you sure this is the only way to make this work? Overwriting a default in this
> > many
> > files doesn't make it look like a great default. This is probably happening because
> > these
>
> This is actually a minority of devicetrees. 26 opposed to 156 (minus
> devicetrees that #include any of the 26 devicetrees) which use all 3 pin
> groups on ethernet.
>
> It's also upstreamed so I'd like to stick with it as much as I can.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/staging.git/commit/?h=staging-testing&id=0a93c0d75809582893e82039143591b9265b520e
>
> > files already specify rgmii2 to be used with the GPIO function, and you're causing
> > some
> > sort of race as to what setting gets applied in the end, by adding rmgii2_pins to the
> > default state for the ðernet node.
>
> Agreed:
>
> [ 1.177349] rt2880-pinmux pinctrl: pin io22 already requested by
> pinctrl; cannot claim for 1e100000.ethernet
> [ 1.196966] rt2880-pinmux pinctrl: pin-22 (1e100000.ethernet) status -22
> [ 1.210312] rt2880-pinmux pinctrl: could not request pin 22 (io22)
> from group rgmii2 on device rt2880-pinmux
> [ 1.230058] mtk_soc_eth 1e100000.ethernet: Error applying setting,
> reverse things back
> [ 1.245853] mtk_soc_eth: probe of 1e100000.ethernet failed with error -22
>
> That's why I overwrite the property without it for the 26 devicetrees.
An alternative would be to add the rgmii2 configuration to &state_default node only on the
devices where it is actually required.
&state_default {
gpio {
groups = /* gpio groups */
function = "gpio";
};
gmac1 {
groups = "rgmii2";
function = "rgmii2";
};
};
>
> >
> > What would make more sense to me, is if the rgmii settings could be enabled in the
> > gmac-s
> > themselves:
> >
> > &gmac0 {
> > pinctrl-names = "default";
> > pinctrl-0 = <&mdio_pins>, <&rgmii1_pins>;
> > }
> >
> > &gmac1 {
> > /* Has state = "disabled" by default */
> > pinctrl-names = "default";
> > pinctrl-0 = <&mdio_pins>, <&rgmii2_pins>;
> > }
> >
> > That way, if the pinctrl-s are processed properly, the rgmii2_pins setting would be
> > applied automatically when gmac1 is enabled. mdio_pins would be applied when either
> > (or
> > both) gmac-s is (are) active.
>
> This is also what I thought would be best but unfortunately that won't
> work. Please read the responses on this thread:
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/83a35aa3-6cb8-2bc4-2ff4-64278bbcd8c8@arinc9.com/T/
Right, I think you've pointed this out already a few times.Sorry for the noise, I should've re-read that thread before replying. :)
Since these gmac-s are always internal to the SoC, pinctrl properties should make sense
there. Did you investigate why these settings don't get applied?
> >
> > > diff --git a/target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621.dtsi
> > > b/target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621.dtsi
> > > index bfb66740a2..56799201c0 100644
> > > --- a/target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621.dtsi
> > > +++ b/target/linux/ramips/dts/mt7621.dtsi
> > > @@ -456,6 +456,9 @@
> > >
> > > mediatek,ethsys = <&sysc>;
> > >
> > > + pinctrl-names = "default";
> > > + pinctrl-0 = <&rgmii1_pins &rgmii2_pins &mdio_pins>;
> >
> > Note that this should be a list of size-1 items like above. In binary form, both come
> > down
> > to the same thing, but this notation would be used on specifications with non-zero
> > cells
> > (cf. "#interrupts-cells = <1>" and "<&int_ctl 16>").
>
> This is something I should address here and on upstream, thanks for
> reporting this!
>
> Let me know what do you think of this patch, I don't want to send v4
> until we're on the same page.
I think it's rather large and intrusive, but if nobody can see any proper alternatives
otherwise, I'm not the one to stop this from being merged.
Best,
Sander
More information about the openwrt-devel
mailing list