Re: [PATCH net] net: macb: Properly handle phylink on at91rm9200 - Russell King

From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
Cc: "Antoine Ténart" <antoine.tenart@bootlin.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: macb: Properly handle phylink on at91rm9200
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:06:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200217170656.GY25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200217165644.GX25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk>

On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 04:56:44PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 11:43:48AM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > at91ether_init was handling the phy mode and speed but since the switch to
> > phylink, the NCFGR register got overwritten by macb_mac_config().
> 
> I don't think this actually explains anything - or at least I can't
> make sense of it with respect to your patch.
> 
> You claim that the NCFGR register gets overwritten in macb_mac_config(),
> but I see that the NCFGR register is read-modify-write in there,
> whereas your new implementation below doesn't bother reading the
> present value.
> 
> I think the issue you're referring to is the clearing of the PAE bit,
> which is also the RM9200_RMII for at91rm9200?
> 
> Next, there's some duplication of code introduced here - it seems
> that the tail end of macb_mac_link_down() and at91ether_mac_link_down()
> are identical, as are the tail end of macb_mac_link_up() and
> at91ether_mac_link_up().
> 
> > Add new phylink callbacks to handle emac and at91rm9200 properly.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7897b071ac3b ("net: macb: convert to phylink")
> > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>
> > ---
> 
> I posted a heads-up message last week about updates to phylink that
> I'll be submitting soon (most of the prerequisits have now been sent
> for review) which touch every phylink_mac_ops-using piece of code in
> the tree.  Unfortunately, this patch introduces a new instance that
> likely isn't going to get my attention, so it's going to create a
> subtle merge conflict between net-next and net trees unless we work
> out some way to deal with it.
> 
> I'm just mentioning that so that some thought can be applied now
> rather than when it actually happens - especially as I've no way to
> test the changes that will be necessary for this driver.

I'm going to post these changes shortly, but not for davem to merge
yet - it would be a good idea if people can test the changes first.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up