Re: [PATCH net-next v4 04/10] net: sparx5: add port module support

From: Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@microchip.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
	Madalin Bucur <madalin.bucur@oss.nxp.com>,
	Mark Einon <mark.einon@gmail.com>,
	Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
	"Simon Horman" <simon.horman@netronome.com>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Bjarni Jonasson <bjarni.jonasson@microchip.com>,
	Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@microchip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 04/10] net: sparx5: add port module support
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 15:05:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <13fc1b7dac31464f8a635336bf41143d7d02b04a.camel@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210621143334.GN22278@shell.armlinux.org.uk>

Hi Russell,

Thanks for your comment.

On Mon, 2021-06-21 at 15:33 +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 10:50:28AM +0200, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> > +static int sparx5_port_pcs_low_set(struct sparx5 *sparx5,
> > +                                struct sparx5_port *port,
> > +                                struct sparx5_port_config *conf)
> > +{
> > +     bool sgmii = false, inband_aneg = false;
> > +     int err;
> > +
> > +     if (!port->conf.has_sfp) {
> > +             sgmii = true; /* Phy is connnected to the MAC */
> > +     } else {
> > +             if (conf->portmode == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_SGMII ||
> > +                 conf->portmode == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_QSGMII)
> > +                     inband_aneg = true; /* Cisco-SGMII in-band-aneg */
> > +             else if (conf->portmode == PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_1000BASEX &&
> > +                      conf->autoneg)
> > +                     inband_aneg = true; /* Clause-37 in-band-aneg */
> 
> I have to wonder why the presence of inband aneg depends on whether
> there's a SFP or not... We don't do that kind of thing in other
> drivers, so what is different here?

Hmm.
I have changed the implementation to use phylink_autoneg_inband() instead of a preconfigured value.

> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
> FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!

-- 
BR
Steen

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
steen.hegelund@microchip.com