Linux-RISC-V Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: E Shattow <e@freeshell.de>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: Henry Bell <dmoo_dv@protonmail.com>,
	Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@esmil.dk>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: dts: starfive: Update ethernet phy0 delay parameter values for Star64
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 18:12:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <434a7a39-de2d-4053-aed7-df556b5c385d@freeshell.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241022-amusement-overreach-c5d1d7fd797b@spud>


On 10/22/24 09:41, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 11:09:51PM -0700, E Shattow wrote:
>> Improve function of Star64 bottom network port phy0 with updated delay values.
>> Initial upstream patches supporting Star64 use the same vendor board support
>> package parameters known to result in an unreliable bottom network port.
> Should I add:
> Fixes: 2606bf583b962 ("riscv: dts: starfive: add Star64 board devicetree")
> CC: stable@vger.kernel.org
> ?
>
> "unreliable" sounds to me like something that is worthy of going to
> fixes/stable

Applying as a fix to stable sounds reasonable, thanks. The bottom 
network port has always been known by Star64 users in reviews and 
discussions to be affected by dropped packets and low network 
throughput. If we want to prove correctness does this require expertise 
and use of an oscilloscope to characterize the signal timing? Though I 
am not sure I got it right, it's not worse than previously was on any of 
these Star64 boards in the wild and probably is better for at least some 
(if not all).

Notable aside is to mention the re-worked motorcomm driver of 
more-recent Linux kernel releases (when compared to the vendor board 
support package) dropped the Fast Ethernet configuration parameters on 
the reasoning that Fast Ethernet (as compared to Gigabit Ethernet) is 
relatively slow enough of a signal that a default delay parameter is 
good enough for all use cases. The non-default Fast Ethernet delay 
parameter values missing from the upstream effort are not possible to 
implement or test for in my effort here, but are no worse or better for 
having this patch applied.

-E


_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv

  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-23  1:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-22  6:09 [PATCH] riscv: dts: starfive: Update ethernet phy0 delay parameter values for Star64 E Shattow
2024-10-22 16:41 ` Conor Dooley
2024-10-23  1:12   ` E Shattow [this message]
2024-10-22 17:39 ` Emil Renner Berthing
2024-10-23 10:30 ` Conor Dooley

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=434a7a39-de2d-4053-aed7-df556b5c385d@freeshell.de \
    --to=e@freeshell.de \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=conor+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=conor@kernel.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dmoo_dv@protonmail.com \
    --cc=kernel@esmil.dk \
    --cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    /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