From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52467C3A5A6 for ; Sun, 22 Sep 2019 17:53:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087B820869 for ; Sun, 22 Sep 2019 17:53:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b="Pyzmbjf/" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388494AbfIVRxA (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Sep 2019 13:53:00 -0400 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:40016 "EHLO pandora.armlinux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388054AbfIVRxA (ORCPT ); Sun, 22 Sep 2019 13:53:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=B021u770oJfMYzL//tDuGzq6YtA3WUYoUSchjaFSERE=; b=Pyzmbjf/x6R18+bUwvzb/FbTB N3TVUfkbq37OUXTbGaM8QuxtNMSAyzrXBMyIaeYW1EOLCN1XxR2NJqGMhkEyy06FUqOpbqKklwMa3 iQO/c1qIY5JYB/ncN5dml1R9euy8SoHeD/ltq0oKMwcVGYMK7AIk4evTsvXw2w/3c88IKkxHMxr8p yWLiMbvkq+6ET3yJApJrONPSvwdo2gu7R070rIjMQGuyc4VvxKo7HDdYdhf7bCdSVDke66HqVyvhg j45A2ju1Mm6s1pFxrPhS1EImBdkd0JNx+Yo+q96hBziljHmyewxhy4gWw7nzw7BLz4MNpi7h7ecLU wskWRoPLw==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([192.168.0.251]:55462) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iC62W-0008Bu-Rl for netdev@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:52:53 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iC62Q-0007vW-64; Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:52:46 +0100 Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 18:52:46 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Florian Fainelli , Heiner Kallweit , tinywrkb , "David S. Miller" , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Attempt to fix regression with AR8035 speed downgrade Message-ID: <20190922175246.GR25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> References: <20190922105932.GP25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20190922165335.GE27014@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190922165335.GE27014@lunn.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 06:53:35PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 11:59:32AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > tinywrkb, please can you test this series to ensure that it fixes > > your problem - the previous version has turned out to be a non-starter > > as it introduces more problems, thanks! > > > > The following series attempts to address an issue spotted by tinywrkb > > with the AR8035 on the Cubox-i2 in a situation where the PHY downgrades > > the negotiated link. > > Hi Russell > > This all looks sensible. > > One things we need to be careful of, is this is for net and so stable. Since the regression was introduced in 5.1, it should be backported to stable trees. > But only some of the patches have fixes-tags. I don't know if we > should add fixes tags to all the patches, just to give back porters a > hint that they are all needed? It won't compile without the patches, > so at least it fails safe. I only put Fixes: tags on patches that are actually fixing something. Quoting submitting-patches.rst: A Fixes: tag indicates that the patch fixes an issue in a previous commit. Since the preceding two patches are just preparing for the fix, and not actually fixing an issue in themselves, it seems wrong to add a Fixes: tag for them. However, mentioning it in the commit message for the patch that does fix the issue is probably worth it. Thanks. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up