From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Fainelli Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/5] Support for PHY test modes Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 10:21:54 -0700 Message-ID: <19a6bf90-03d5-aa63-5f35-3b26801b79a9@gmail.com> References: <20180428003237.1536-1-f.fainelli@gmail.com> <20180429.225554.2165914401649980919.davem@davemloft.net> <20180430232448.GB25602@lunn.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, rmk@armlinux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cphealy@gmail.com, nikita.yoush@cogentembedded.com, vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, Nisar.Sayed@microchip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com To: Andrew Lunn , David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180430232448.GB25602@lunn.ch> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 04/30/2018 04:24 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> Turning these tests on will typically result in the link partner >> dropping the link with us, and the interface will be non-functional as >> far as the data path is concerned (similar to an isolation mode). This >> might warrant properly reporting that to user-space through e.g: a >> private IFF_* value maybe? > > Hi Florian > > I think a IFF_* value would be a good idea. We want to give the user > some indicate why they don't have working networking. ip link show > showing PHY-TEST-MODE would help. IF_OPER_TESTING as defined in RFC 2863 looks like the correct way to signal that. I did a quick test and setting operstate to IFF_OPER_TESTING seems to correctly get reflected by iproute2/ifconfig which no longer see RUNNING though the interface is still UP. If we couple that with a proper phy_stop(), this would IMHO be consistent from an user experience perspective. David, would that look reasonable to you? -- Florian