[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZL5l44e5cdODvwna@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 12:52:03 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Revanth Kumar Uppala <ruppala@...dia.com>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
"hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Narayan Reddy <narayanr@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] net: phy: aquantia: Enable MAC Controlled EEE
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 11:29:28AM +0000, Revanth Kumar Uppala wrote:
> > Ideally, you should only do SmartEEE, if the SoC MAC is dumb and does not have
> > EEE itself. I guess if you are doing rate adaptation, or MACSEC in the PHY, then
> > you might be forced to use SmartEEE since the SoC MAC is somewhat decoupled
> > from the PHY.
> >
> > At the moment, we don't have a good story for SmartEEE. It should be
> > configured in the same way as normal EEE, ethtool --set-eee etc. I've got a
> > rewrite of normal EEE in the works. Once that is merged i hope SmartEEE will be
> > next.
> "ethtool --set-eee" is a dynamic way of enabling normal EEE and here we are doing the same normal EEE but configuring it by default in aqr107_config_init() instead of doing it dynamically.
So, setting the MAC_CNTRL_EEE bits is just enabling the standard IEEE
paths in the PHY to allow the IEEE defined EEE architecture to work?
If that's all its doing, I wonder why they aren't set by default...
seems rather strange.
--
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