From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34B76C433E5 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:14:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14061206F6 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:14:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726717AbgGXTOp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:14:45 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:54222 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726381AbgGXTOp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:14:45 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1jz39Q-006iXQ-To; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:14:36 +0200 Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:14:36 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Jeremy Linton Cc: Calvin Johnson , Russell King - ARM Linux admin , Jon , Cristi Sovaiala , Ioana Ciornei , Andy Shevchenko , Florian Fainelli , Madalin Bucur , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux.cj@gmail.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v7 1/6] Documentation: ACPI: DSD: Document MDIO PHY Message-ID: <20200724191436.GH1594328@lunn.ch> References: <20200715090400.4733-1-calvin.johnson@oss.nxp.com> <20200715090400.4733-2-calvin.johnson@oss.nxp.com> <1a031e62-1e87-fdc1-b672-e3ccf3530fda@arm.com> <20200724133931.GF1472201@lunn.ch> <97973095-5458-8ac2-890c-667f4ea6cd0e@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <97973095-5458-8ac2-890c-667f4ea6cd0e@arm.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > Hence my previous comment that we should consider this an escape > hatch rather than the last word in how to describe networking on > ACPI/SBSA platforms. One problem i have is that this patch set suggests ACPI can be used to describe complex network hardware. It is opening the door for others to follow and add more ACPI support in networking. How long before it is not considered an escape hatch, but the front door? For an example, see https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/patch/1595417547-18957-3-git-send-email-vikas.singh@puresoftware.com/ It is hard to see what the big picture is here. The [0/2] patch is not particularly good. But it makes it clear that people are wanting to add fixed-link PHYs into ACPI. These are pseudo devices, used to make the MAC think it is connected to a PHY when it is not. The MAC still gets informed of link speed, etc via the standard PHYLIB API. They are mostly used for when the Ethernet MAC is directly connected to an Ethernet Switch, at a MAC to MAC level. Now i could be wrong, but are Ethernet switches something you expect to see on ACPI/SBSA platforms? Or is this a legitimate use of the escape hatch? Andrew