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=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,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 EE288C1B0D8 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:44:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEF41238A1 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:44:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726777AbgLGTo3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:44:29 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:32902 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725822AbgLGTo3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:44:29 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-x144.google.com (mail-il1-x144.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::144]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BF8BC061794 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:43:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x144.google.com with SMTP id x15so13361146ilq.1 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:43:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=newoldbits-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BMbdvaySsQ/4/F+vh9ynJhvabOGmwdOHgWhKJea+J5E=; b=nhu1pkPKF+A7xP7LWBivSxeXgwTFkm0BPjC2BpXaUFRC3OzXKlXBneybvE4NyR/V+Z iG55x3ZRQhXSxmYOSkuIus15TsNahgNny+LNKY8eqG9xGil6rrtTmOFpHWRxAC2r/7ax RxMUkqeO62Jki/xnlAEF/2bPQv729Fpy3pFzwOWYmW2MP7dkfHXlfDYOK42/VDVyYWL0 T2BmNgs4DN/zrg8xH0/Rm+YN6EcW6JOj6NAJf9IJ5HxDqVr6/bWEyvcSEwi1pV6aZyNx pktTUBvKBOE7aDG51VSe1FGHHnlgxHA+HFeRnpFLUpben65ueY58i4+dBNz8V/Rk2eFb Zolg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BMbdvaySsQ/4/F+vh9ynJhvabOGmwdOHgWhKJea+J5E=; b=HWYvbvxk10s0E8hAi7jiroWm1H3NaobXeXDEywln6OblLW0Z1l/55q1Z0qQGbw+mL3 44FXd1MywqafUAsoJhvzxq575eN35NCx/F8DmzEJumEBJJzjldcGAdel37vfyQc+5MxZ AjJWJaVYX0wI5jwM9yeIGdpUdCWE//S9V3BLqTYP3FJtpMOvURG/kMZ3FISnUStmxCVe uTOFuP9GE1KGMWatctShbsTqU7h3s61XZJhUED8CzDdKbEhCARV44s8dDHtSj3j1yT+z 0EZRz18t9O/qfV1KWdMYjVZdBqaKz3Ek39Qtq1e+VZjbUqoobmrsEZSsq/oRzKq0KEV7 MFbA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531VnRTpfuUX4zvTGzYXcneqoBb6j4Q/xUwA2Cod/KESllwUzqDR Gsjxoz59M9h8RB/LDw86owC1TjVzymyFUpJccpP9AA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxSzCN7dpPUwtvyAaZ683bgE/NifG7xkGeY+vGgUQUI6lSv+uA2jYlkyu3PjCOhc3G/Fci9tB7WFs+l0rCntag= X-Received: by 2002:a92:d9cd:: with SMTP id n13mr21850683ilq.96.1607370222948; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:43:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201201083408.51006-1-jean.pihet@newoldbits.com> <20201201184100.GN2073444@lunn.ch> <20201201204516.GA2324545@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20201201204516.GA2324545@lunn.ch> From: Jean Pihet Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 20:43:32 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: dsa: ksz8795: adjust CPU link to host interface To: Andrew Lunn Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Ryan Barnett , Conrad Ratschan , Hugo Cornelis , Arnout Vandecappelle Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Hi Andrew, On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:45 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > Configure the host port of the switch to match the host interface > > settings. This is useful when the switch is directly connected to the > > host MAC interface. > > Why do you need this when no other board does? Why is your board > special? > > As i said before, i'm guessing your board has back to back PHYs > between the SoC and the switch and nobody else does. Is that the > reason why? Without this, nothing is configuring the switch MAC to the > results of the auto-neg between the two PHYs? Yes that is the case. From here I see this patch is too specific to our setup, and so cannot be considered for merging. > > Or am i completely wrong? No, this is completely right. I will drop this patch then. Thank you very much for reviewing and for the suggestions. BR, Jean > > Andrew >