[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FD7DBD6-C10A-44D8-BD3C-59751BA8FE5A@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 01:42:05 +0000
From: "Modi, Geet" <geet.modi@...com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: "Nagalla, Hari" <hnagalla@...com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Sharma, Vikram" <vikram.sharma@...com>,
"dmurphy@...com" <dmurphy@...com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [EXTERNAL] Re:
[PATCH] net: phy: dp83tc811: modify list of interrupts enabled at
initialization
Hi Andrew,
Please be assure the monitors are part of the PHY and well captured in device datasheet. The only reason to go selectively is as we have not carefully reviewed the other interrupts usage by application, hence don't want to make the change in haste.
Regards,
Geet
On 9/9/21, 6:31 PM, "Andrew Lunn" <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 12:41:53AM +0000, Modi, Geet wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> As mentioned we want to do this in phases:
> a) this patch to disable the Overvoltage driver interrupt
> b) After carefully considering other interrupts, plan a follow-on patch to take care of other interrupts.
I still don't get it. Why just Over volt now and not the rest, which
are equally useless? It makes me think there is something seriously
wrong with over voltage, which you are not telling us about. Maybe an
interrupt storm? If there is something broken here, this patch needs
to be back ported to stable.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists