[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201115094827.74eacbc3@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 09:48:27 +0100
From: Marek Behún <kabel@...nel.org>
To: Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
Michal Hrusecki <Michal.Hrusecky@....cz>,
Tomas Hlavacek <tomas.hlavacek@....cz>,
Bedřicha Košatu <bedrich.kosata@....cz>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: mvneta: Fix validation of 2.5G HSGMII
without comphy
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 01:41:51 +0100
Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de> wrote:
> - if (pp->comphy || state->interface == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500BASEX) {
> + if (pp->comphy || state->interface == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500BASEX
> + || state->interface == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_NA) {
> phylink_set(mask, 2500baseT_Full);
> phylink_set(mask, 2500baseX_Full);
> }
No, this will cause, on systems without comphy described, phylink to
think that 2500baseX/T is possible. But without comphy how can it be
configured?
Marek
Powered by blists - more mailing lists