[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b9c293f8-dcd2-47ab-7c35-d46a7eeec321@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 07:08:38 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>
Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
UNGLinuxDriver <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: phylink: Fix CuSFP issue in phylink
On 11/17/2020 5:45 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> Do you have the Marvell PHY driver either built-in or available as a
>>> module? I suspect the problem is you don't. You will need the Marvell
>>> PHY driver to correctly drive the PHY, you can't rely on the fallback
>>> driver for SFPs.
>> Correct. I was using the generic driver and that does clearly not
>> work. After including the Marvell driver the callback to the validate
>> function happens as expected. Thanks for the support.
>
> Hi Russell
>
> Maybe we should have MDIO_I2C driver select the Marvell PHY driver?
It was suggested a while ago that MARVELL_PHY follow the SFP
configuration symbol and that we would warn when a CuSFP module was used
with the Generic PHY driver:
https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg253839.html
Eventually we did not make progress towards creating a list of modules
that would require a specialized PHY driver, maybe we can start now?
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists