[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b911cfcc-1c6f-1092-3803-6a57f785bde1@seco.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 13:49:03 -0400
From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>,
Antoine Tenart <atenart@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] net: macb: Fix several edge cases in validate
On 10/26/21 1:46 PM, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 01:28:15PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
>> Actually, according to the Zynq UltraScale+ Devices Register Reference
>> [1], the PCS does not support 10/100. So should SGMII even fall through
>> here?
>>
>> [1] https://www.xilinx.com/html_docs/registers/ug1087/gem___pcs_control.html
>
> Hmm. That brings with it fundamental question: if the PCS supports 1G
> only, does it _actually_ support Cisco SGMII, or does it only support
> 1000base-X?
>
Of course, in the technical reference manual [1], they say
> The line rate is 1 Gb/s as SGMII hardwired to function at 1 Gb/s only.
> However, the data transfer rate can be forced down to 100 Mb/s or 10
> Mb/s if the link partner is not capable.
which sounds like the normal byte-repetition of SGMII...
And they also talk about how the autonegotiation timeout and control words are different.
--Sean
[1] https://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/user_guides/ug1085-zynq-ultrascale-trm.pdf
Powered by blists - more mailing lists