[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1208347791.6958.279.camel@pasglop>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:09:51 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: M B <super.firetwister@...glemail.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...abs.org>
Subject: Re: Phy read timeout in ibm_new_emac driver
> My Micrel/Kendin KSZ8721BT on my ppc405EP board needs one us longer to
> finish. I was able to reproduce this all the time. So I wonder if the
> timeout of 100us is defined by the MII standard, or by the author of
> the driver?
> If it's a standard I've still a bad feeling if we just correct the
> timeout to 100us, maybe 110 should be fine. If it's not defined by the
> standard, I would add 50% to the timeout. It won't slow down other
> phys, but a scan on the phy bus might get slowed down.
> Same applies for __emac_mdio_write.
>
> Oh and we could save a us by putting the udelay(1) after the if section ;-)
Increasing the timeout is fine. In fact, EMAC specifically can sleep in
it's MDIO access routines (it already takes mutexes) so maybe a good
option here is to use longer sleeping delays and less iterations.
Somebody knows off hand what the standard says the timeout should be ? I
can check that tomorrow, I don't have it at hand right now and it's
getting late but feel free to beat me to it :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists