[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+h21ho29TRG8JYfSaaSsoxM-mg0-yOKBNCq9wbHDHCf2pkdUg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:33:33 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH devicetree 3/4] arm64: dts: fsl: ls1028a: add node for
Felix switch
Hi Andrew,
On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 17:29, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>
> Hi Vladimir
>
> > + /* Internal port with DSA tagging */
> > + mscc_felix_port4: port@4 {
> > + reg = <4>;
> > + phy-mode = "gmii";
>
> Is it really using gmii? Often in SoC connections use something else,
> and phy-mode = "internal" is more appropriate.
>
What would be that "something else"? Given that the host port and the
switch are completely different hardware IP blocks, I would assume
that a parallel GMII is what's connecting them, no optimizations done.
Certainly no serializer. But I don't know for sure.
Does it matter, in the end?
> > + ethernet = <&enetc_port2>;
> > +
> > + fixed-link {
> > + speed = <2500>;
> > + full-duplex;
> > + };
>
> gmii and 2500 also don't really go together.
Not even if you raise the clock frequency?
>
> Andrew
Thanks,
-Vladimir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists