[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d5d46c21-0afa-0c51-9baf-4f99de94bbd5@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 12:20:31 -0500
From: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: <f.fainelli@...il.com>, <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/4] dt-bindings: net: Add RGMII internal
delay for DP83869
Andrew/Florian
On 5/20/20 11:43 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> I am interested in knowing where that is documented. I want to RTM I
>> grepped for a few different words but came up empty
> Hi Dan
>
> It probably is not well documented, but one example would be
>
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/ethernet-controller.yaml
>
> says:
>
> # RX and TX delays are added by the MAC when required
> - rgmii
>
> # RGMII with internal RX and TX delays provided by the PHY,
> # the MAC should not add the RX or TX delays in this case
> - rgmii-id
>
> # RGMII with internal RX delay provided by the PHY, the MAC
> # should not add an RX delay in this case
> - rgmii-rxid
>
> # RGMII with internal TX delay provided by the PHY, the MAC
> # should not add an TX delay in this case
>
> Andrew
OKI I read that. I also looked at a couple other drivers too.
I am wondering if rx-internal-delay and tx-internal-delay should become
a common property like tx/rx fifo-depth
And properly document how to use it or at least the expectation on use.
Dan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists