From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Klaus Kudielka <klaus.kudielka@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Florian Fainelli" <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Uwe Kleine-König" <uwe@kleine-koenig.org>,
"Tomas Hlavacek" <tmshlvck@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] phylink: support for devices with MAC sharing SFP cage & PHY (e.g. Turris Omnia)
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2018 18:43:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181231174306.GC3239@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <62ef7a14-69ad-d517-b10b-dacabf9188d9@gmail.com>
On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 12:24:18PM +0100, Klaus Kudielka wrote:
> On 30.12.18 10:51, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>
> >Some of the Marvell Ethernet switches have a similar setup. Some ports
> >have both an internal PHY and a SERDES port which can be connected to an
> >SFP cage. Whichever gets link first is connected to the MAC.
>
> This decision is taken by hardware? I am just wondering how the outcome
> would be detected unambiguously by software. (Any documentation?)
The Marvell documentation is not public. I would have to check, but i
think there is a bit which tells you. But as Florian pointed out, this
can be indirectly controlled from software, in that a PHY which is
configured down will never get link, in the same way an SFP with its
receiver disabled will never get link. So software to enable one or
the other would work.
> Such a "generic" solution would be restricted (per MAC) to a maximum of one
> SFP (fiber or copper), and one separate PHY, right? The main difference
> between boards would be the switching logic.
Yes, that seems a sensible restriction.
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-31 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-30 8:25 [RFC] phylink: support for devices with MAC sharing SFP cage & PHY (e.g. Turris Omnia) Klaus Kudielka
2018-12-30 9:51 ` Andrew Lunn
2018-12-30 22:35 ` Florian Fainelli
2018-12-30 22:41 ` Andrew Lunn
2019-01-04 9:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-12-31 11:24 ` Klaus Kudielka
2018-12-31 17:43 ` Andrew Lunn [this message]
2019-01-04 6:26 ` Klaus Kudielka
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=20181231174306.GC3239@lunn.ch \
--to=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=klaus.kudielka@gmail.com \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tmshlvck@gmail.com \
--cc=uwe@kleine-koenig.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).