[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180508.201449.398803363821420826.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 20:14:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: antoine.tenart@...tlin.com
Cc: linux@...linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com,
maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, gregory.clement@...tlin.com,
miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, nadavh@...vell.com, stefanc@...vell.com,
ymarkman@...vell.com, mw@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: sfp: handle cases where neither
BR,min nor BR,max is given
From: Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>
Date: Fri, 4 May 2018 17:21:03 +0200
> When computing the bitrate using values read from an SFP module EEPROM,
> we use the nominal BR plus BR,min and BR,max to determine the
> boundaries. But in some cases BR,min and BR,max aren't provided, which
> led the SFP code to end up having the nominal value for both the minimum
> and maximum bitrate values. When using a passive cable, the nominal
> value should be used as the maximum one, and there is no minimum one
> so we should use 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>
Applied, thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists