[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YauCzEZPGMaRMKf6@lunn.ch>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2021 16:01:32 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
George McCollister <george.mccollister@...il.com>,
Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 05/12] net: dsa: bcm_sf2: convert to
phylink_generic_validate()
> The order of 1000baseKX/Full and 1000baseT/Full is such that we
> prefer 1000baseKX/Full over 1000baseT/Full, but 1000baseKX/Full is
> a lot rarer than 1000baseT/Full, and thus is much less likely to
> be preferred.
>
> This causes phylink problems - it means a fixed link specifying a
> speed of 1G and full duplex gets an ethtool linkmode of 1000baseKX/Full
> rather than 1000baseT/Full as would be expected - and since we offer
> userspace a software emulation of a conventional copper PHY, we want
> to offer copper modes in preference to anything else. However, we do
> still want to allow the rarer modes as well.
2.5G already places T before X, so it makes it more uniform with that.
For 10G, T comes last. Maybe we should also consider this case? Do we
see more 10G copper than fibre/backplane?
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists