net: dsa: sja1105: use detected device id instead of DT one on mismatch

Although we can detect the chip revision 100% at runtime, it is useful
to specify it in the device tree compatible string too, because
otherwise there would be no way to assess the correctness of device tree
bindings statically, without booting a board (only some switch versions
have internal RGMII delays and/or an SGMII port).

But for testing the P/Q/R/S support, what I have is a reworked board
with the SJA1105T replaced by a pin-compatible SJA1105Q, and I don't
want to keep a separate device tree blob just for this one-off board.
Since just the chip has been replaced, its RGMII delay setup is
inherently the same (meaning: delays added by the PHY on the slave
ports, and by PCB traces on the fixed-link CPU port).

For this board, I'd rather have the driver shout at me, but go ahead and
use what it found even if it doesn't match what it's been told is there.

[    2.970826] sja1105 spi0.1: Device tree specifies chip SJA1105T but found SJA1105Q, please fix it!
[    2.980010] sja1105 spi0.1: Probed switch chip: SJA1105Q
[    3.005082] sja1105 spi0.1: Enabled switch tagging

Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_main.c b/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_main.c
index 5079e4a..c3f6f12 100644 (file)
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/sja1105/sja1105_main.c
@@ -3391,11 +3391,14 @@ static const struct dsa_switch_ops sja1105_switch_ops = {
        .devlink_param_set      = sja1105_devlink_param_set,
 };
 
+static const struct of_device_id sja1105_dt_ids[];
+
 static int sja1105_check_device_id(struct sja1105_private *priv)
 {
        const struct sja1105_regs *regs = priv->info->regs;
        u8 prod_id[SJA1105_SIZE_DEVICE_ID] = {0};
        struct device *dev = &priv->spidev->dev;
+       const struct of_device_id *match;
        u32 device_id;
        u64 part_no;
        int rc;
@@ -3405,12 +3408,6 @@ static int sja1105_check_device_id(struct sja1105_private *priv)
        if (rc < 0)
                return rc;
 
-       if (device_id != priv->info->device_id) {
-               dev_err(dev, "Expected device ID 0x%llx but read 0x%x\n",
-                       priv->info->device_id, device_id);
-               return -ENODEV;
-       }
-
        rc = sja1105_xfer_buf(priv, SPI_READ, regs->prod_id, prod_id,
                              SJA1105_SIZE_DEVICE_ID);
        if (rc < 0)
@@ -3418,13 +3415,29 @@ static int sja1105_check_device_id(struct sja1105_private *priv)
 
        sja1105_unpack(prod_id, &part_no, 19, 4, SJA1105_SIZE_DEVICE_ID);
 
-       if (part_no != priv->info->part_no) {
-               dev_err(dev, "Expected part number 0x%llx but read 0x%llx\n",
-                       priv->info->part_no, part_no);
-               return -ENODEV;
+       for (match = sja1105_dt_ids; match->compatible; match++) {
+               const struct sja1105_info *info = match->data;
+
+               /* Is what's been probed in our match table at all? */
+               if (info->device_id != device_id || info->part_no != part_no)
+                       continue;
+
+               /* But is it what's in the device tree? */
+               if (priv->info->device_id != device_id ||
+                   priv->info->part_no != part_no) {
+                       dev_warn(dev, "Device tree specifies chip %s but found %s, please fix it!\n",
+                                priv->info->name, info->name);
+                       /* It isn't. No problem, pick that up. */
+                       priv->info = info;
+               }
+
+               return 0;
        }
 
-       return 0;
+       dev_err(dev, "Unexpected {device ID, part number}: 0x%x 0x%llx\n",
+               device_id, part_no);
+
+       return -ENODEV;
 }
 
 static int sja1105_probe(struct spi_device *spi)