[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y/pdcIKpM1QjdUdI@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:11:44 +0000
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>,
John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>,
Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
Mark Lee <Mark-MC.Lee@...iatek.com>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 4/4] net: mtk_eth_soc: note interface modes
not set in supported_interfaces
On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 05:49:18PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 12:36:26PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> I think it would be good to add a patch description here.
>
> Code change looks good to me.
As noted in the cover message, this is to highlight the issue to
hopefully get folk to think what we should do about RMII and REVMII
in this driver - basically, should we continue to support them, or
remove it completely.
Either way, this patch won't hit net-next in its current form.
Essentially, the choice is either we remove these two switch cases,
or we add these interface modes to the supported_interfaces array.
I'd rather those with mtk_eth_soc made the decision, even though it
is highly unlikely that these modes are used on the hardware they
have - as I don't have any mediatek hardware.
Thanks.
--
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