[PATCH] linux: generic: net: dsa: mv88e6xxx LED support

[Linus Walleij]

On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 6:23 PM Daniel Golle <daniel at makrotopia.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 06, 2024 at 05:32:04PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > This solution that is needed for some routers to provide proper
> > LED activity when controlled directly by the MV88E6xxx switch,
> > has just been merged in upstream Linux.
> > [...]
> > diff --git a/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/714-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Support-LED-control.patch b/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/714-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Support-LED-control.patch
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..8557fe2510b8
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/714-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Support-LED-control.patch
> > [...]
> > diff --git a/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/768-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Request-assisted-learning-on-CPU-port.patch b/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/768-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Request-assisted-learning-on-CPU-port.patch
> > index 3f3d7572e015..92f87f619873 100644
> > --- a/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/768-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Request-assisted-learning-on-CPU-port.patch
> > +++ b/target/linux/generic/pending-6.6/768-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Request-assisted-learning-on-CPU-port.patch
>
> As both patches are now already part of mainline Linux they should go
> into target/linux/generic/backport-6.6/ with a 'v6.13' prefix (as they
> are expected to be part of Linux v6.13).

I looked into Tobias' patch for assisted learning on the CPU port
and it is actually not merged upstream, it was part of an RFC
series in 2021 and I don't know what happened with that or
why it is still part of the OpenWrt patch set, the rest of that RFC
patch set is not in OpenWrt so I have no idea what the story is
here...
https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20210116012515.3152-8-tobias@waldekranz.com/

It came into OpenWrt here:
https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/openwrt.git;a=commit;f=target/linux/generic/pending-5.4/768-net-dsa-mv88e6xxx-Request-assisted-learning-on-CPU-port.patch;hb=920eaab1d8179035d0ae1047e75cf9a50da6a6eb

>From context it seems like Tobias' patch is something that should
have been merged upstream ages ago but fell between the cracks
because it happened to be in an unrelated RFC series.

Tobias is this something you/we should push upstream?

Yours,
Linus Walleij