linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: Jisheng Zhang <Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: realtek: clear interrupt during init for rtl8211f
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2020 22:16:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5657764c-3de8-667f-b4a7-5dbaf2e15303@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200617170926.5e582bad@xhacker.debian>

On 17.06.2020 11:09, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2020 19:30:38 +0200 Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>>
>> On 15.05.2020 18:18, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/15/2020 12:41 AM, Jisheng Zhang wrote:  
>>>> On Thu, 14 May 2020 21:50:53 +0200 Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14.05.2020 08:25, Jisheng Zhang wrote:  
>>>>>> On Wed, 13 May 2020 20:45:13 +0200 Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 13.05.2020 08:51, Jisheng Zhang wrote:  
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 May 2020 20:43:40 +0200 Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12.05.2020 12:46, Jisheng Zhang wrote:  
>>>>>>>>>> The PHY Register Accessible Interrupt is enabled by default, so
>>>>>>>>>> there's such an interrupt during init. In PHY POLL mode case, the
>>>>>>>>>> INTB/PMEB pin is alway active, it is not good. Clear the interrupt by
>>>>>>>>>> calling rtl8211f_ack_interrupt().  
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As you say "it's not good" w/o elaborating a little bit more on it:
>>>>>>>>> Do you face any actual issue? Or do you just think that it's not nice?  
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The INTB/PMEB pin can be used in two different modes:
>>>>>>>> INTB: used for interrupt
>>>>>>>> PMEB: special mode for Wake-on-LAN
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The PHY Register Accessible Interrupt is enabled by
>>>>>>>> default, there's always such an interrupt during the init. In PHY POLL mode
>>>>>>>> case, the pin is always active. If platforms plans to use the INTB/PMEB pin
>>>>>>>> as WOL, then the platform will see WOL active. It's not good.
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> The platform should listen to this pin only once WOL has been configured and
>>>>>>> the pin has been switched to PMEB function. For the latter you first would
>>>>>>> have to implement the set_wol callback in the PHY driver.
>>>>>>> Or where in which code do you plan to switch the pin function to PMEB?  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it's better to switch the pin function in set_wol callback. But this
>>>>>> is another story. No matter WOL has been configured or not, keeping the
>>>>>> INTB/PMEB pin active is not good. what do you think?
>>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>> It shouldn't hurt (at least it didn't hurt for the last years), because no
>>>>> listener should listen to the pin w/o having it configured before.
>>>>> So better extend the PHY driver first (set_wol, ..), and then do the follow-up
>>>>> platform changes (e.g. DT config of a connected GPIO).  
>>>>
>>>> There are two sides involved here: the listener, it should not listen to the pin
>>>> as you pointed out; the phy side, this patch tries to make the phy side
>>>> behave normally -- not keep the INTB/PMEB pin always active. The listener
>>>> side behaves correctly doesn't mean the phy side could keep the pin active.
>>>>
>>>> When .set_wol isn't implemented, this patch could make the system suspend/resume
>>>> work properly.
>>>>
>>>> PS: even with set_wol implemented as configure the pin mode, I think we
>>>> still need to clear the interrupt for phy poll mode either in set_wol
>>>> or as this patch does.  
>>>
>>> I agree with Jisheng here, Heiner, is there a reason you are pushing
>>> back on the change? Acknowledging prior interrupts while configuring the
>>> PHY is a common and established practice.
>>>  
>> First it's about the justification of the change as such, and second about the
>> question whether the change should be in the driver or in phylib.
>>
>> Acking interrupts we do already if the PHY is configured for interrupt mode,
>> we call phy_clear_interrupt() at the beginning of phy_enable_interrupts()
>> and at the end of phy_disable_interrupts().
>> When using polling mode there is no strict need to ack interrupts.
>> If we say however that interrupts should be acked in general, then I think
>> it's not specific to RTL8211F, but it's something for phylib. Most likely
>> we would have to add a call to phy_clear_interrupt() to phy_init_hw().
> 
> it's specific to RTL8211F from the following two PoV:
> 1. the PIN is shared between INTB and PMEB.
> 2. the PHY Register Accessible Interrupt is enabled by default
> 
If we clear the interrupt in config_init() and one interrupt source is
active per chip default, then wouldn't the irq pin be active soon again?

I was thinking about calling phy_disable_interrupts() in phy_init_hw(),
to have a defined init state, as we don't know in which state the PHY is
if the PHY driver is loaded. We shouldn't assume that it's the chip
power-on defaults, BIOS or boot loader could have changed this.
Or in case of dual-boot systems the other OS could leave the PHY in
whatever state.

This made me think about an issue we may have currently:
Interrupts are enabled in phy_request_interrupt() only. If the system
hibernates, then PHY may load power-on defaults on restore.
And mdio_bus_phy_restore() just calls phy_init_hw() and doesn't
care about interrupt config. Means after waking up from hibernation
we may have lost PHY interrupt config.

> I didn't see such behaviors with other PHYs.
> 
> Thanks
> 
Heiner

      reply	other threads:[~2020-06-21 20:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-12 10:46 [PATCH] net: phy: realtek: clear interrupt during init for rtl8211f Jisheng Zhang
2020-05-12 18:43 ` Heiner Kallweit
2020-05-13  6:51   ` Jisheng Zhang
2020-05-13 18:45     ` Heiner Kallweit
2020-05-14  6:25       ` Jisheng Zhang
2020-05-14 19:50         ` Heiner Kallweit
2020-05-15  7:41           ` Jisheng Zhang
2020-05-15 16:18             ` Florian Fainelli
2020-05-15 17:30               ` Heiner Kallweit
2020-06-17  9:09                 ` Jisheng Zhang
2020-06-21 20:16                   ` Heiner Kallweit [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5657764c-3de8-667f-b4a7-5dbaf2e15303@gmail.com \
    --to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jisheng.Zhang@synaptics.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).