[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180103.103920.1858989046632683988.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2018 10:39:20 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: linux@...linux.org.uk
Cc: andrew@...n.ch, f.fainelli@...il.com,
thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] Convert mvneta to phylink
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 17:22:42 +0000
> This series converts mvneta to use phylink, which is necessary to
> support the SFP cages on SolidRun's Clearfog platform. This series just
> converts mvneta without adding the DT parts - having discussed with
> Andrew, we believe we're too close to the merge window to submit that
> patch.
>
> I've split the "net: mvneta: convert to phylink" patch up to make it
> easier to review, and in doing so, spotted some minor corner cases that
> needed to be fixed along the way.
>
> This series depends on the previously merged phylink patches in netdev,
> along with the recently reviewed 7 patch series "Resolve races in phy
> accessors" without which, the race described in patch 5 of that series
> is very evident when triggering a dummy hibernate cycle.
>
> This series also illustrates how to convert mvpp2 to phylink.
>
> mvneta is the only user of the fixed_phy_update_state() API, and this
> becomes redundant with the conversion.
>
> It would be good to get this series not only reviewed, but also
> independently tested to ensure that I haven't missed anything - I only
> have the Clearfog platform to test on, and that doesn't support all the
> different interface modes that mvneta supports.
>
> A particularly interesting side effect of this series is that DSA
> switches no longer need the "CPU" port and DSA facing MAC ethernet
> instance to be marked as a fixed link anymore with mvneta - we can use
> 1000BaseX mode, and the DSA to CPU link will use the 802.3z negotiation
> to determine the link properties without needing the link parameters to
> be explicitly stated in DT - that is a subject of a future patch.
This looks good to me, series applied, thanks Russell.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists