[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXGQDeOGj+2+tMnPhjoPJRX+eTh8-94yaH_bGwDATL7pkg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:16:36 +0100
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Steve McIntyre <steve@...val.com>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
"open list:BPF JIT for MIPS (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Willy Liu <willy.liu@...ltek.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Masahisa Kojima <masahisa.kojima@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: realtek PHY commit bbc4d71d63549 causes regression
On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 17:45, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>
> > However, that leaves the question why bbc4d71d63549bcd was backported,
> > although I understand why the discussion is a bit trickier there. But
> > if it did not fix a regression, only broken code that never worked in
> > the first place, I am not convinced it belongs in -stable.
>
> Please ask Serge Semin what platform he tested on. I kind of expect it
> worked for him, in some limited way, enough that it passed his
> testing.
>
I'll make a note here that a rather large number of platforms got
broken by the same fix for the Realtek PHY driver:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/?q=bbc4d71d6354
I seriously doubt whether disabling TX/RX delay when it is enabled by
h/w straps is the right thing to do here.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists