[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260119113018.48da59a2@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 11:30:18 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Josua Mayer <josua@...id-run.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
<pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Mikhail Anikin
<mikhail.anikin@...id-run.com>, Rabeeh Khoury <rabeeh@...id-run.com>, Yazan
Shhady <yazan.shhady@...id-run.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: sfp: support 25G long-range modules (extended
compliance code 0x3)
On Sun, 18 Jan 2026 16:07:38 +0200 Josua Mayer wrote:
> @@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ static void sfp_module_parse_support(struct sfp_bus *bus,
> case SFF8024_ECC_100GBASE_LR4_25GBASE_LR:
> case SFF8024_ECC_100GBASE_ER4_25GBASE_ER:
> phylink_set(modes, 100000baseLR4_ER4_Full);
> + phylink_set(modes, 25000baseLR_Full);
I _think_ the discussion here concluded that the patch is insufficient
/ DoA? Either way, I wanted to relay that AI code review points out
we may also want to set __set_bit(PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_25GBASER,
interfaces) here:
https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-review.html?id=c91c0f54-56d5-4356-89cd-b57cbb289495
Powered by blists - more mailing lists