[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID:
<TYZPR01MB5556C13F2BE2042DDE466C95C9C92@TYZPR01MB5556.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 00:37:36 +0800
From: Ziyang Huang <hzyitc@...look.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: olteanv@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk,
javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com, john@...ozen.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: net: dsa: qca8k: add internal-PHY-to-PHY
CPU link example
在 2025/3/4 0:15, Andrew Lunn 写道:
> ...
>
> The previous patch still causes it to look at port 0 and then port 6
> first. Only if they are not CPU ports will it look at other ports. So
> this example does not work, port 6 will be the CPU port, even with the
> properties you added.
Sorry, I forget that the following patch is still penging:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230620063747.19175-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com/
With this path, we can have multi CPU link.
> When you fix this, i also think it would be good to extend:
>
>> + /* PHY-to-PHY CPU link */
>
> with the work internal.
>
> This also seems an odd architecture to me. If this is SoC internal,
> why not do a MAC to MAC link? What benefit do you get from having the
> PHYs?
This patches are for IPQ50xx platform which has only one a SGMII/SGMII+
link and a MDI link.
It has 2 common designs:
1. SGMII+ is used to connect a 2.5G PHY, which make qca8337 only be
able to be connected through the MDI link.
2. Both SGMII and MDI links are used to connect the qca8337, so we can
get 2G link which is beneficial in NAT mode (total 2G bidirectional).
>
>
> Andrew
>
> ---
> pw-bot: cr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists