[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZLbRTLRbHW/Xt2hL@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 18:52:12 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org>,
Xu Liang <lxu@...linear.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 03/11] net: phy: replace is_c45 with
phy_accces_mode
On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 07:40:49PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > static inline bool phy_has_c45_registers(struct phy_device *phydev)
> > {
> > - return phydev->is_c45;
> > + return phydev->access_mode != PHY_ACCESS_C22;
> > }
>
> So this is making me wounder if we have a clean separation between
> register spaces and access methods.
>
> Should there be a phy_has_c22_registers() ?
Yes, I've been wondering that. I've recently heard about a Realtek PHY
which is supported by our realtek driver, but appears on a SFP that
can only do C45 accesses. However, the realtek driver is written to
use C22 accesses to this PHY - and the PHY supports both. So currently
it doesn't work.
That's just an additional data point for thinking about this, I haven't
formulated a solution to it yet.
--
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