Re: [PATCH] net: phy: broadcom: Wire suspend/resume for BCM54612E

[Marco von Rosenberg <marcovr@selfnet.de>]

On Friday, November 3, 2023 4:39:55 AM CET Florian Fainelli wrote:
> We have an unconditional call to __phy_resume() in phy_start() and we
> should always have a call to phy_start() regardless of the path though
> you have a point Andrew that we should ensure that by the time
> phy_init_hw() is called we have taken the device out of IDDQ-SR.
> 
> > I agree with all of your points. This is just one way which happens to
> > solve this specific problem. Of course it might be asymmetric to see the
> > patch as a solution to my problem. However is there anything
> > fundamentally wrong with adding suspend/resume callbacks? I see some
> > other drivers having these callbacks defined and some not (it seems a bit
> > inconsistent throughout the drivers in broadcom.c to be honest).
> > 
> > I'm wondering if I should just omit this whole "motivation" paragraph in
> > the commit message and just use the commit message of commit 38b6a9073007
> > ("net: phy: broadcom: Wire suspend/resume for BCM50610 and BCM50610M") as
> > a template. I mean, regardless of my motivation, I would say it makes
> > sense for this PHY to support suspend and resume.
> 
> I would remove the motivation aspect from the paragraph and we could
> also improve the driver a bit to ensure that IDDQ-SR is disabled upon
> config_init(). Other than that your patch is just fine with me. Can you
> re-submit in a few days when net-next opens again?

Ok, I'll re-submit the patch when net-next is open again with an updated 
commit message. And I agree, disabling IDDQ-SR in config_init() would make 
sense for a future patch since this would fix this potential issue also for 
other PHYs.

	Marco