All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Joel Johnson <mrjoel@lixil.net>
Cc: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mvneta: comphy regression with SolidRun ClearFog
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 07:00:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219060026.GA32536@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af7602ae737cbc21ce7f01318105ae73@lixil.net>

Hi Joel,

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:14:48PM -0700, Joel Johnson wrote:
> In updating recently I'm encountering a regression with the mvneta driver on
> SolidRun ClearFog Base devices. I originally filed the bug with Debian
> (https://bugs.debian.org/951409) since I was using distro provided packages,
> but after further investigation I have isolated the issue as related to
> comphy support added during development for kernel version 5.1.
> 
> When booting stock kernels up to 5.0 everything works as expected with three
> ethernet devices identified and functional. However, running any kernel 5.1
> or later, I only have a single ethernet device available. The single device
> available appears to be the one attached to the SoC itself and not connected
> via SerDes lanes using comphy, i.e. the one defined at f1070000.ethernet.

When you say "or later", what most recent version did you try ? My
clearfog works perfectly on 5.4 with the new comphy. I'm having the 2
RJ45 ports working at 1 Gbps and the SFP port working at 1 and 2.5 Gbps.

> I'm not overly Device Tree savvy, but a cursory inspection of f548ced15f90
> at least matches my U-Boot SerDes lane configuration, with comphy1 and
> comphy5 expected to match lane #1 and #5 respectively.

I used to have to modify the device tree in the past, but haven't been
doing so for a while (well in fact I do have a small change there just
in order to enable eMMC which I have on my SOM, and I have just rechecked
that *only* the emmc stuff differs from the regular clearfog-base).

> The only notable difference I can see in /sys/firmware/devicetree is
> expected given the change in dtb, with the following new entries:
> 
>     hexdump -C
> /sys/firmware/devicetree/base/soc/internal-regs/ethernet@30000/phys
>     00000000  00 00 00 0e 00 00 00 01                           |........|
> 
>     hexdump -C
> /sys/firmware/devicetree/base/soc/internal-regs/ethernet@34000/phys
>     00000000  00 00 00 10 00 00 00 02                           |........|

I've just checked and have exactly the same values there.

> Likely unrelated, but a difference that also stood out is that
> armada-388-clearfog.dts contains a managed = "in-band-status" entry for eth1
> but not eth2.

If I remember well it's because with this port being attached to the
switch on the clearfog pro, there's no link status.

I used to have issues in the past with the PHY stuff on this board (up
to 4.9), and *seem* to remember that I once ended up in a similar
situation as yours due to a config issue, though I don't remmeber which
one. Here's what I have matching PHY in my config:

   root@clearfog:~# zgrep ^CONFIG.*PHY /proc/config.gz 
   CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT=y
   CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PHYS_TO_DMA=y
   CONFIG_NETFILTER_XT_MATCH_PHYSDEV=m
   CONFIG_PHYLINK=y
   CONFIG_PHYLIB=y
   CONFIG_SWPHY=y
   CONFIG_FIXED_PHY=y
   CONFIG_MARVELL_PHY=y
   CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY=y
   CONFIG_PHY_MVEBU_A38X_COMPHY=y
   CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_PHYS=0xf1012000
   root@clearfog:~# uname -a
   Linux clearfog 5.4.2-clearfog #10 SMP Sun Dec 8 00:10:40 CET 2019 armv7l GNU/Linux

I'm suspecting it was the FIXED_PHY that I was missing once but I would
be saying crap.

Hoping this helps,
Willy

  reply	other threads:[~2020-02-19  6:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-19  5:14 mvneta: comphy regression with SolidRun ClearFog Joel Johnson
2020-02-19  6:00 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2020-02-19  9:22 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-19 13:49   ` Joel Johnson
2020-02-20 10:12     ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-20 15:34       ` Joel Johnson
2020-02-20 15:45         ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-20 16:08           ` Willy Tarreau

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=20200219060026.GA32536@1wt.eu \
    --to=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=baruch@tkos.co.il \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
    --cc=mrjoel@lixil.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.