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 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 663DDCCD1BB for ; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 18:11:27 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=rA2LYAqEb92Q4g4Yq5hfL5BuClXd15oA216rjXGuuxw=; b=kYKeyJMBZhm5xVv7myZzkXtXX1 OXAmh6QDyNB9hpRlIOjf+nJedycnUm63mO/0DX7LzMQSb2fvwX0l6jrOy4OaKOd7M+jMp20HS5X7C vT/g4t/ZN3AcF09RvMrMvbHmkyRT2W/JIddxboPpynMy6EvnPg1VLWkOcrOIzqlti8ARNSP0/tCB5 mMitUSCNgUnZGp8/YODXk1EGjQsSwQWw4KvTgvuYab0oEkvqoQ0R4c8J4Bsb5TZsG1a9UDKZ9IYRX BP19qrBoosB3UQuaWhPJ4u6zQbrgun6biGZeXxwHVuh0NyYr86MUSmNCc4p2CO9EBSZmt2/irMIdP z+TziJEw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vBdIu-00000003wTp-3yVY; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 18:11:20 +0000 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([2001:4d48:ad52:32c8:5054:ff:fe00:142]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vBdIs-00000003wTL-1KTt for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 18:11:19 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=rA2LYAqEb92Q4g4Yq5hfL5BuClXd15oA216rjXGuuxw=; b=oUDa7GAInMplqxvZSxR7xdnKfh gnH6WvqRq/oIBsMGn5B4Ks5GnfWDskOvVYABlOA8tn8Phd8Dp7vZrjhCud8Fzmqj/iaKFdMEuCxnY kZvFEFV0mmL5eZU2ZxkV8WAEFsf2UL0JcrMjG7K/4TbXTaabn8auv8wRmqRN4miJ74OHF2XkN71iw RGfxe6FO+nXNyGucn/kr9fZQW6Fr+rd9AbX3hTGL4ag4Y+E6rLalGw44eGLv/adpU0DlyaCbVSoTN E1fcCouudt62ivDHgkNWQpp8exExqQYx1XBEDtlg4ILJUHnKvov2uOrXITsn5NXJgdUAhPKZAyyla 2VkdLFkw==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:57282) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vBdIf-000000005HL-3eJg; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 19:11:05 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vBdIb-000000000uh-3ctw; Wed, 22 Oct 2025 19:11:01 +0100 Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 19:11:01 +0100 From: "Russell King (Oracle)" To: Maxime Chevallier Cc: Andrew Lunn , Heiner Kallweit , Alexandre Torgue , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, Maxime Coquelin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Abeni Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/6] net: phylink: add phylink managed wake-on-lan PHY speed control Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20251022_111118_657127_FD8403AD X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 11.77 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Oct 22, 2025 at 04:28:19PM +0200, Maxime Chevallier wrote: > Hi Russell, > > > + > > + if (phylink_phy_pm_speed_ctrl(pl)) > > + phy_speed_down(pl->phydev, false); > > Should this rather be phylink_speed_down, to take into account the fact > that the PHY might be on SFP ? either here or directly in > phylink_phy_pm_speed_ctrl() above ? I think using phylink_speed_*() makes more sense than merging the test into phylink_phy_pm_speed_ctrl(). If something changes in what we do with speed_up/down() then we want everyone to be affected (not that I forsee any change there.) Logically though... -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!