From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>,
o.rempel@pengutronix.de, Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFC: future of ethtool tunables (Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] ethtool: Add BroadRReach Master/Slave PHY tunable)
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 15:04:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b3973d0-0c41-c986-5f72-e03a5fddce55@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200325215538.GB27427@lunn.ch>
On 3/25/2020 2:55 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> What might be useful, on the other hand, would be device specific
>> tunables: an interface allowing device drivers to define a list of
>> tunables and their types for each device. It would be a generalization
>> of private flags. There is, of course, the risk that we could end up
>> with multiple NIC vendors defining the same parameters, each under
>> a different name and with slightly different semantics.
>
> Hi Michal
>
> I'm not too happy to let PHY drivers do whatever they want. So far,
> all PHY tunables have been generic. Any T1 PHY can implement control
> of master/slave, and there is no reason for each PHY to do it
> different to any other PHY. Downshift is a generic concept, multiple
> PHYs have implemented it, and they all implement it the same. Only
> Marvell currently supports fast link down, but the API is generic
> enough that other PHYs could implement it, if the hardware supports
> it.
>
> I don't however mind if it gets a different name, or a different tool,
> etc.
BroadRReach is a standard feature that is available on other PHYs for
instance (Broadcom at least has it too) so defining a common name for
this particular tunable knob here would make sense.
If we are to create vendor/device specific tunables, can we agree on a
namespace to use, something like:
<vendor>:<device>:<parameter name>
--
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-25 22:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-25 10:17 [RFC][PATCH 1/2] ethtool: Add BroadRReach Master/Slave PHY tunable Marek Vasut
2020-03-25 10:17 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] net: phy: tja11xx: Add BroadRReach Master/Slave support into TJA11xx PHY driver Marek Vasut
2020-03-25 13:47 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-03-25 13:43 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] ethtool: Add BroadRReach Master/Slave PHY tunable Andrew Lunn
2020-03-25 13:51 ` Marek Vasut
2020-03-25 16:49 ` RFC: future of ethtool tunables (Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] ethtool: Add BroadRReach Master/Slave PHY tunable) Michal Kubecek
2020-03-25 21:55 ` Andrew Lunn
2020-03-25 22:04 ` Florian Fainelli [this message]
2020-03-25 23:42 ` Michal Kubecek
2020-03-26 9:05 ` Oleksij Rempel
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=2b3973d0-0c41-c986-5f72-e03a5fddce55@gmail.com \
--to=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=jdelvare@suse.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=marex@denx.de \
--cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
/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).