[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220818171255.ntfdxasulitkzinx@skbuf>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 20:12:55 +0300
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Alexandru Marginean <alexandru.marginean@....com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/11] net: phy: Add 1000BASE-KX interface mode
On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 01:03:54PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> Well, I suppose the real reason is that this will cause a merge conflict
> (or lack of one), since this series introduces phylink_interface_max_speed
> in patch 7, which is supposed to contain all the phy modes. So depending on
> what gets merged first, the other series will have to be modified and resent.
>
> To be honest, I had expected that trivial patches like that would have been
> applied and merged already.
There's nothing trivial about this patch. 1000Base-KX is not a phy-mode
in exactly the same way that 1000Base-T isn't, either. If you want to
bring PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_10GKR as a "yes, but" counterexample, it was
later clarified that 10gbase-r was what was actually meant in that case,
and we keep 10gbase-kr as phy-mode only for compatibility with some
device trees.
I'd suggest resolving the merge conflict without 1000Base-KX and
splitting off a separate discussion about this topic. Otherwise it will
unnecessarily detract from PAUSE-based rate adaptation.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists