Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm: dts: mt7623: add gmacs to mt7623.dtsi

[Arınç ÜNAL]

On 25.01.2023 19:45, Frank Wunderlich wrote:
> Am 20. Januar 2023 21:53:14 MEZ schrieb "Arınç ÜNAL" <arinc.unal@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> > index 25d31e40a553..5eb698a90d34 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623.dtsi
> > @@ -981,6 +981,20 @@ eth: ethernet@1b100000 {
> > 		#address-cells = <1>;
> > 		#size-cells = <0>;
> > 		status = "disabled";
> > +
> > +		gmac0: mac@0 {
> > +			compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
> > +			reg = <0>;
> > +			phy-mode = "trgmii";
> > +			status = "disabled";
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		gmac1: mac@1 {
> > +			compatible = "mediatek,eth-mac";
> > +			reg = <1>;
> > +			phy-mode = "rgmii";
> > +			status = "disabled";
> > +		};
> > 	};
>
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> > index 5008115d2494..a5800a524302 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/mt7623n-bananapi-bpi-r2.dts
> > @@ -175,9 +175,7 @@ &eth {
> > 	status = "okay";
> >
> > 	gmac0: mac@0 {
>
> Should node not be accessed with label (&gmac0) instead of defining it again and shadow the one from dtsi?

I think that's up to preference. I kept it the current way as it's 
cleaner than taking it out of &eth.

Arınç