[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZWRWylzfCLu2XXHy@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 08:43:54 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Luo Jie <quic_luoj@...cinc.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, hkallweit1@...il.com, corbet@....net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] net: phy: introduce core support for phy-mode =
"10g-qxgmii"
On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 06:20:16PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 02:07:27PM +0800, Luo Jie wrote:
> > switch (interface) {
> > case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_USXGMII:
> > - caps |= MAC_10000FD | MAC_5000FD | MAC_2500FD;
> > + caps |= MAC_10000FD | MAC_5000FD;
> > + fallthrough;
>
> This change seems to refer to the second paragraph, where as the rest
> of the code is about the first. Or does splitting this cause a bisect
> problem?
I'm not sure what you're referring to here, and by over-trimming the
context, this probably gives an insight into a misunderstanding.
This hunk (and the next) does _not_ change what USXGMII ends up with.
It moves MAC_2500FD to be under the 10G_QXGMII case from the USXGMII
case, and we will _fallthrough_ from the USXGMII case into thte
10G_QXGMII case. So, USXGMII still ends up with MAC_2500FD.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists