From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH CFT 02/30] net: fec: iMX6 FEC does not support half-duplex gigabit Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 12:47:18 +0100 Message-ID: <20140708114718.GI21766@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20140627151542.GL32514@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20140708064611.GF7827@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Fugang Duan To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Return-path: Received: from gw-1.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.217]:58562 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750774AbaGHLrV (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2014 07:47:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140708064611.GF7827@pengutronix.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 08:46:11AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > Hi Russell, >=20 > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:19:03PM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > The iMX6 gigabit FEC does not support half-duplex gigabit operation= =2E > > Phys attacked to the FEC may support this, and we currently do noth= ing > Even if it might be interpreted as an attack to connect such a phy to > the FEC, I'd still call it "attach" here :-) You are right, but unfortunately your comment comes too late; this is the actual submission for David to integrate the patches into net-next rather than for review, and David has already integrated the change int= o his tree. Hence, the comment is unable to be fixed now. Thanks anyway. --=20 =46TTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... sl= owly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.