[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3285a386-5c3e-445d-94d7-4157240a4eb8@lunn.ch>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:13:31 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Ronnie.Kunin@...rochip.com
Cc: Raju.Lakkaraju@...rochip.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
edumazet@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bryan.Whitehead@...rochip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net V2 2/2] net: lan743x: support WOL in MAC even when
PHY does not
> > This is the bit that is missing from your commit message, and maybe it should be in a comment. The
> > interrupt controller is part of the MAC. So you need to leave MAC burning power, maybe even
> > processing packets, because you cannot disable the MAC but leave the interrupt controller functioning,
> > so that it can trigger a wake up via PCIe.
>
> I think there is a terminology problem here. Within MCHP we
> sometimes call "the MAC" to the whole ethernet controller chip that
> has everything (i.e. actual MAC, FIFOs, filtering engines, offloads,
> interrupt controller, bus interface, etc) except the PHY.
> That is what Raju probably means when he says that the interrupt is
> handled by "the MAC". While the registers that control
> enabling/disabling processing of the phy interrupt do reside within
> the MAC block's register set in the ethernet controller, it neither
> means that the extensive parts of the actual MAC block need to be
> kept enabled nor that processing packets has to occur in the MAC in
> order for the PCI11x1x chip to detect an event coming from the PHY
> that should be processed as a wake event over PCIe
I was expecting that, which is why i suggested looking at shutting
down what is not needed. The current lan743x_ethtool_set_wol() does
not do any of that.
> I am Windows driver expert, not Linux so I may be wrong for Linux,
> but with the advent of dynamic PM in modern OSs (connected and then
> modern standby in Windows, I remember also autosuspend - at least in
> USB, maybe not applicable to PCIe - in Linux ) we have stayed away
> from renegotiating the link to down speed during suspend - resume
> events since those interfere with / delay connectivity
> significantly.
Renegotiation does take a little over 1s. It maybe not worth it for
suspend to RAM. But for suspend to disk, a resume is probably going to
take awhile, so maybe 1 second is less noticeable.
Also you maybe need to think about is EU norms about standby and power
off consumption. Going from 1G to 10M can save you 1W.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists