From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B9FA3FC2 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 20:17:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id z9-20020a7bc149000000b002e8861aff59so3153016wmi.0 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 13:17:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eTA4MTa9fR7VQl13W35WSPsOZXqyOOwDKcbbECJxILw=; b=G3z6lMvK9dc+oIbe10pHol1ME0wuCgBBEhuDUYy4KRHTHkIP+f2/0op8WYYdbodZGl 5Ey8pzsGLFOvKwE9uZjxa+/CtjRoiRSNMGf7/kpWAI/dboyehMeOmQRdLLfRnWdhJkF2 eRS566MiVYLuEnJ+gYRM72BJ3B1A1qIp2VPxi4yuYI2EP6Hs5uksIRThWp3R8M0a4yuY BGBIpUEtaqHyn/5oMWnysrc6DuqtDySLFLr5jpt40W+uAZQ0D9LbPvw7Jr9sx1bw8rYw nySCH+kIPMmzNUxYxW4Tm6ofO1GxQ8rKd2OiTombEmBKbBmOjGBV6n36vm69+tHrzZLD OBLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eTA4MTa9fR7VQl13W35WSPsOZXqyOOwDKcbbECJxILw=; b=HOPvkvgOwS8XvijRuAXLtNeEjdKXpfdJjCy7GhXMf68FCpXElKd23IySqcrYIs9qke oEeUnZ5DQDlmtQQKD5hDRUvgz6Dd4dduqbaURCMkTlS2/FWyDt40iS82oe5zCUzM188y bVV2U1k/otCBSWMUgrYYMEjR7G7R4a5JLgoWyUgt3rFmqpOLRdWldAHafQsyc+rZIaHX UL9eome+R1YIdM7e9iZQYX+wA63jgsJp/OpcKGoPzPchr9W9YyaXqT2ChCSR32quSFH1 Uhh3i6vtQAgI+0nv+BSpnyc78oJ2b0n2klZSvPT9itYTKDnW0irmFySx4M5sSZPtdAKx hKuA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531oz97Co79V35XddCjPNKQnO3hEbJmEKgd56qjTsOl1XqkH3lvy X2sdBRw+sVc9o57BqQEl6Gg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDme9//+ocNFePWdkzBV2WpSwAReezNa5CDT36Ft0F9wihyqeujVjDZqvfUmnPB7f6zyG9UQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:4cd:: with SMTP id 196mr6146070wme.10.1630441077752; Tue, 31 Aug 2021 13:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kista.localnet (cpe-86-58-29-253.static.triera.net. [86.58.29.253]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm3508781wmc.41.2021.08.31.13.17.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Aug 2021 13:17:57 -0700 (PDT) From: Jernej =?utf-8?B?xaBrcmFiZWM=?= To: =?utf-8?B?Q2zDqW1lbnQgQsWTc2No?= Cc: Maxime Ripard , Chen-Yu Tsai , Willy Liu , Rob Herring , "David S. Miller" , Andrew Lunn , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: sun50i: h5: NanoPI Neo 2: phy-mode rgmii-id Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 22:17:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4192454.QcIURlJl1r@kista> In-Reply-To: References: <20210830151645.18018-1-u@pkh.me> <116454729.UZi3dMzWh7@jernej-laptop> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi! Dne ponedeljek, 30. avgust 2021 ob 23:25:23 CEST je Cl=C3=A9ment B=C5=93sch= napisal(a): > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:49:37PM +0200, Jernej =C5=A0krabec wrote: > > Hi! > >=20 >=20 > Hi, >=20 > > Dne ponedeljek, 30. avgust 2021 ob 17:16:45 CEST je Cl=C3=A9ment B=C5= =93sch=20 napisal(a): > > > Since commit bbc4d71d6354 ("net: phy: realtek: fix rtl8211e rx/tx del= ay > > > config") network is broken on the NanoPi Neo 2. > > >=20 > > > This patch changes the phy-mode to use internal delays both for RX and > > > TX as has been done for other boards affected by the same commit. > > >=20 > > > Fixes: bbc4d71d6354 ("net: phy: realtek: fix rtl8211e rx/tx delay con= fig") > >=20 > > This commit fixes DT issue, so "fixes" tag should be: > > Fixes: 44a94c7ef989 ("arm64: dts: allwinner: H5: Restore EMAC changes") > >=20 > > Here, a node with wrong phy-mode property was added to NanoPi Neo 2 boa= rd=20 DT. =20 >=20 > Shouldn't I add it instead of replacing? I followed what I observed in > `git log --grep bbc4d71d63` where all the commits pretty much follow this > pattern: that commit is the one causing the actual observed regression, > while 44a94c7ef989 is much older, and while it's wrong, it wasn't causing > an issue in practice. >=20 > Or did I misunderstand something? With that grep command you limited yourself only to those commits which=20 reference this particular commit. There are others, which also change "rgmi= i"=20 to "rgmii-id" and reference other commits, like: 544cc3f8573b ("arm64: dts: allwinner: h6: orangepi-one-plus: Fix ethernet") 97a38c1c213b ("arm64: dts: allwinner: beelink-gs1: Enable both RGMII RX/TX= =20 delay") (there are more). Anyway, let's continue this discussion in Andrew's thread. >=20 > > Other than that, this patch is fine and once fixes tag is fixed, you ca= n add: > > Reviewed-by: Jernej Skrabec > >=20 > > For next version, you should: > > - change fixed tag > > - add my review-by tag right above your signed-off-by tag > > - mark patch as v2 (add "-v2" parameter to git format-patch) > > - describe change right under "---" line > >=20 >=20 > Will do. Please wait until discussion reaches a conclusion. >=20 > > Note, if you borked something when sending, you should mark patch or pa= tch=20 > > series as "RESEND", so recipients don't look for changes in two subsequ= ent=20 e- > > mails (--subject-prefix=3D"RESEND PATCH"). >=20 > Not sure I follow you so before I disturb everyone with more noise I'd > just like to confirm: you mean a git send-email in-reply-to=3D[broken pat= ch > attempt] (the one where I borked the --cc), right? But with what patch? > I'm a bit confused here. That's just for the future reference. No need to do anything now for this=20 patch. If you bork any send attempt in the future, recreate same patch(es)= =20 with this additional tag ("RESEND") and send them again. >=20 > > Thanks for the fix! >=20 > No problem; I really think a scan of all the other boards would be > meaningful though, it looks like a lot of them got fixed but there are > many other candidates and the issue feels pretty critical to me > (regression, and no network at all). I guess you speak for all boards, not just those with Allwinner SoC? I fixe= d as=20 many boards as I have - testing is very desired. On some boards rgmii was=20 changed to rgmii-txid, so it's not as straightforward as search and replace= =2E=20 It could be also deducted from schematics, but at least one Allwinner board= =20 has this configured in HW wrong (SW fix was needed for that board) and othe= r=20 boards might not have schematics publicy available. In short, I wouldn't start mass generating patches for this. Best regards, Jernej >=20 > --=20 > Cl=C3=A9ment B. >=20