From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Joel Johnson <mrjoel@lixil.net>
Cc: Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mvneta: comphy regression with SolidRun ClearFog
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 07:00:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200219060026.GA32536@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af7602ae737cbc21ce7f01318105ae73@lixil.net>
Hi Joel,
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:14:48PM -0700, Joel Johnson wrote:
> In updating recently I'm encountering a regression with the mvneta driver on
> SolidRun ClearFog Base devices. I originally filed the bug with Debian
> (https://bugs.debian.org/951409) since I was using distro provided packages,
> but after further investigation I have isolated the issue as related to
> comphy support added during development for kernel version 5.1.
>
> When booting stock kernels up to 5.0 everything works as expected with three
> ethernet devices identified and functional. However, running any kernel 5.1
> or later, I only have a single ethernet device available. The single device
> available appears to be the one attached to the SoC itself and not connected
> via SerDes lanes using comphy, i.e. the one defined at f1070000.ethernet.
When you say "or later", what most recent version did you try ? My
clearfog works perfectly on 5.4 with the new comphy. I'm having the 2
RJ45 ports working at 1 Gbps and the SFP port working at 1 and 2.5 Gbps.
> I'm not overly Device Tree savvy, but a cursory inspection of f548ced15f90
> at least matches my U-Boot SerDes lane configuration, with comphy1 and
> comphy5 expected to match lane #1 and #5 respectively.
I used to have to modify the device tree in the past, but haven't been
doing so for a while (well in fact I do have a small change there just
in order to enable eMMC which I have on my SOM, and I have just rechecked
that *only* the emmc stuff differs from the regular clearfog-base).
> The only notable difference I can see in /sys/firmware/devicetree is
> expected given the change in dtb, with the following new entries:
>
> hexdump -C
> /sys/firmware/devicetree/base/soc/internal-regs/ethernet@30000/phys
> 00000000 00 00 00 0e 00 00 00 01 |........|
>
> hexdump -C
> /sys/firmware/devicetree/base/soc/internal-regs/ethernet@34000/phys
> 00000000 00 00 00 10 00 00 00 02 |........|
I've just checked and have exactly the same values there.
> Likely unrelated, but a difference that also stood out is that
> armada-388-clearfog.dts contains a managed = "in-band-status" entry for eth1
> but not eth2.
If I remember well it's because with this port being attached to the
switch on the clearfog pro, there's no link status.
I used to have issues in the past with the PHY stuff on this board (up
to 4.9), and *seem* to remember that I once ended up in a similar
situation as yours due to a config issue, though I don't remmeber which
one. Here's what I have matching PHY in my config:
root@clearfog:~# zgrep ^CONFIG.*PHY /proc/config.gz
CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT=y
CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_PHYS_TO_DMA=y
CONFIG_NETFILTER_XT_MATCH_PHYSDEV=m
CONFIG_PHYLINK=y
CONFIG_PHYLIB=y
CONFIG_SWPHY=y
CONFIG_FIXED_PHY=y
CONFIG_MARVELL_PHY=y
CONFIG_GENERIC_PHY=y
CONFIG_PHY_MVEBU_A38X_COMPHY=y
CONFIG_DEBUG_UART_PHYS=0xf1012000
root@clearfog:~# uname -a
Linux clearfog 5.4.2-clearfog #10 SMP Sun Dec 8 00:10:40 CET 2019 armv7l GNU/Linux
I'm suspecting it was the FIXED_PHY that I was missing once but I would
be saying crap.
Hoping this helps,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-19 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-19 5:14 mvneta: comphy regression with SolidRun ClearFog Joel Johnson
2020-02-19 6:00 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2020-02-19 9:22 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-19 13:49 ` Joel Johnson
2020-02-20 10:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-20 15:34 ` Joel Johnson
2020-02-20 15:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux admin
2020-02-20 16:08 ` Willy Tarreau
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=20200219060026.GA32536@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=baruch@tkos.co.il \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
--cc=mrjoel@lixil.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
/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).