[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230208130830.GA19895@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2023 14:08:30 +0100
From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To: Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc: Arun.Ramadoss@...rochip.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 5/9] net: phy: add
genphy_c45_ethtool_get/set_eee() support
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 11:32:07AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> Add replacement for phy_ethtool_get/set_eee() functions.
>
> Current phy_ethtool_get/set_eee() implementation is great and it is
> possible to make it even better:
> - this functionality is for devices implementing parts of IEEE 802.3
> specification beyond Clause 22. The better place for this code is
> phy-c45.c
> - currently it is able to do read/write operations on PHYs with
> different abilities to not existing registers. It is better to
> use stored supported_eee abilities to avoid false read/write
> operations.
> - the eee_active detection will provide wrong results on not supported
> link modes. It is better to validate speed/duplex properties against
> supported EEE link modes.
> - it is able to support only limited amount of link modes. We have more
> EEE link modes...
>
> By refactoring this code I address most of this point except of the last
> one. Adding additional EEE link modes will need more work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
> +/**
> + * genphy_c45_eee_is_active - get EEE supported and status
> + * @phydev: target phy_device struct
> + * @data: ethtool_eee data
I forgot to update this comment.
> + *
> + * Description: it reports the possible state of EEE functionality.
> + */
> +int genphy_c45_eee_is_active(struct phy_device *phydev, unsigned long *adv,
> + unsigned long *lp, bool *is_enabled)
> +{
> + __ETHTOOL_DECLARE_LINK_MODE_MASK(tmp_adv) = {};
> + __ETHTOOL_DECLARE_LINK_MODE_MASK(tmp_lp) = {};
> + __ETHTOOL_DECLARE_LINK_MODE_MASK(common);
> + bool eee_enabled, eee_active;
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = genphy_c45_read_eee_adv(phydev, tmp_adv);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = genphy_c45_read_eee_lpa(phydev, tmp_lp);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + eee_enabled = !linkmode_empty(tmp_adv);
> + linkmode_and(common, tmp_adv, tmp_lp);
> + if (eee_enabled && !linkmode_empty(common))i
and linkmode_empty() can be replaced with linkmode_intersects()
I'll wait if more comments will come and make a new version tomorrow.
Regards,
Oleksij
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists