[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150208203211.GB23581@lunn.ch>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2015 21:32:11 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: f.fainelli@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: DSA: Attaching phy twice?
Hi Florian
Have you seen messages like this before?
[ 2.495126] Distributed Switch Architecture driver version 0.1
[ 2.501358] mvneta f1070000.ethernet eth0: [0]: detected a Marvell 88E6172 switch
[ 2.556441] libphy: dsa slave smi: probed
[ 2.638292] net lan4: PHY already attached
[ 2.733285] net lan3: PHY already attached
[ 2.820749] net lan2: PHY already attached
[ 2.910749] net lan1: PHY already attached
[ 3.000772] net internet: PHY already attached
What appears to be happening is that dsa_slave_phy_setup() is finding
the phy for the port via device tree and using of_phy_connect(), or it
uses the fall back of taking a phy from the switch internal mdio bus
and calling phy_connect_direct(). So if a phy is found,
phy_attach_direct() gets called to attach the phy to the device.
Then in dsa_slave_create(), a second call to phy_attach() is
made. This is when we get the warning "PHY already attached", and it
returns EBUSY, which is ignored.
Is this code at the end of dsa_slave_create() doing anything useful?
if (p->phy != NULL) {
if (ds->drv->get_phy_flags)
p->phy->dev_flags |= ds->drv->get_phy_flags(ds, port);
phy_attach(slave_dev, dev_name(&p->phy->dev),
PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_GMII);
p->phy->autoneg = AUTONEG_ENABLE;
p->phy->speed = 0;
p->phy->duplex = 0;
p->phy->advertising = p->phy->supported | ADVERTISED_Autoneg;
}
My quick testing suggests its not useful, so if you agree, i will
submit a patch removing it. Or am i missing something?
Thanks
Andrew
--
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