[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJN1KkxUNX_U1ib3Z-CVA8xFZ3mA6CC43JUVKYYOZT-Xgb2fVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 22:40:28 +0200
From: Paweł Dembicki <paweldembicki@...il.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 6/6] net: phy: vitesse: repair vsc73xx autonegotiation
pt., 2 sie 2024 o 15:03 Russell King (Oracle) <linux@...linux.org.uk>
napisał(a):
>
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 10:04:03AM +0200, Pawel Dembicki wrote:
> > When the vsc73xx mdio bus work properly, the generic autonegotiation
> > configuration works well.
> >
> > Vsc73xx have auto MDI-X disabled by default in forced mode. This commit
> > enables it.
>
> Why not implement proper MDI(-X) configuration support so that the user
> can configure it as desired?
>
This approach is a copy of an idea from other PHYs in the 'vitesse' driver.
I can implement MDI(-X) configuration and status.
But the question is: Should I do it in this patch series or send a
separate patch to net-next after this series gets merged?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists