[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUu2OlXElk5GR/3N@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 00:03:22 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>,
Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>,
Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@...ox.ru>,
Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@...rochip.com>,
Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>,
"UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com" <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
"bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com"
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 net-next 2/6] net: phylink: introduce a generic
method for querying PHY in-band autoneg capability
On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 09:48:28PM +0000, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:31:16AM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:22:19PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 09:14:42PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > > +static unsigned int phylink_fixup_inband_aneg(struct phylink *pl,
> > > > + struct phy_device *phy,
> > > > + unsigned int mode)
> > > > +{
> > > > + int ret;
> > > > +
> > > > + ret = phy_validate_inband_aneg(phy, pl->link_interface);
> > > > + if (ret == PHY_INBAND_ANEG_UNKNOWN) {
> > > > + phylink_dbg(pl,
> > > > + "PHY driver does not report in-band autoneg capability, assuming %s\n",
> > > > + phylink_autoneg_inband(mode) ? "true" : "false");
> > > > +
> > > > + return mode;
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + if (phylink_autoneg_inband(mode) && !(ret & PHY_INBAND_ANEG_ON)) {
> > > > + phylink_err(pl,
> > > > + "Requested in-band autoneg but driver does not support this, disabling it.\n");
> > >
> > > If we add support to the BCM84881 driver to work with
> > > phy_validate_inband_aneg(), then this will always return
> > > PHY_INBAND_ANEG_OFF and never PHY_INBAND_ANEG_ON. Consequently,
> > > this will always produce this "error". It is not an error in the
> > > SFP case, but it is if firmware is misconfigured.
> > >
> > > So, this needs better handling - we should not be issuing an error-
> > > level kernel message for something that is "normal".
> >
> > Is this better?
> >
> > phylink_printk(phy_on_sfp(phy) ? KERN_DEBUG : KERN_ERR, pl,
> > "Requested in-band autoneg but driver does not support this, disabling it.\n");
>
> Ah, not sure whether that was a trick question or not, but
> phylink_fixup_inband_aneg function does not get called for the SFP code
> path, I even noted this in the commit message but forgot:
No it wasn't a trick question. I thought you were calling
phylink_fixup_inband_aneg() from phylink_sfp_config(), but I see now
that you don't. That's what happens when you try and rush to review.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists