[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZIh48DMvIr+/isR3@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 15:10:56 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 2/4] net: phylink: add EEE management
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 02:26:22PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > I'm wondering if, rather than adding a bit to mac_capabilities, whether
> > instead:
> >
> > 1) add eee_capabilities and re-use the existing MAC_CAP_* definitions
> > to indicate what speeds the MAC supports LPI. This doesn't seem to
> > solve (c).
> > 2) add a phy interface bitmap indicating which interface modes support
> > LPI generation.
> >
> > Phylib already has similar with its supported_eee link mode bitmap,
> > which presumably MACs can knock out link modes that they know they
> > wouldn't support.
>
> O.K, I can probably make that work. None of the MAC drivers i've
> looked at need this flexibility yet, but we can add it now.
>
> I do however wounder if it should be called lpi_capabilities, not
> eee_capabilities. These patches are all about making the core deal
> with 99% of EEE. All the MAC driver needs to do is enable/disable
> sending LPI and set the timer value. So we are really talking about
> the MACs LPI capabilities.
No problem with calling it lpi_capabilities.
Thanks!
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists