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 BB056C433E0 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 16:48:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69053206F4 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 16:48:45 +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="OUVn2icf" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726990AbgFJQso (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:48:44 -0400 Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:45084 "EHLO pandora.armlinux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726358AbgFJQsn (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:48:43 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 471 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:48:43 EDT 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=S8iHepBurBEVpEkNzyHelIVvWMvm3PqnFP7CA0HZti4=; b=OUVn2icfPUljLSc1yEHjmuQ2G JB5EHckJpeN3XTCGi3Q0hcxd30TqaA5D/iq2lA3jD7j5NvSGgBNIwk7o4KC2ruzoLnOcHyoUCVbFB bpKOeLub4k22GA9RlJ7xF4LAYxcNWJrR78U9tKdyjZvBtxV+pNm1PJXI0Tn17Fd+eNeUq8F+2R5hK SuA3ckq34LscxexZyuawD2RANs5q35rttF3c80WRcG8FAmT9xmhaKw3Bu9qDOxJQjqRf97r0/hVE8 Na2lo1c3OFLGoD3Ritiq++EzoySoFA1cjogc8wnt1J094oE+bFgOiZLEUx32KI6VShFY0W50nK0+k zCChww9FA==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([fd8f:7570:feb6:1:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:43804) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jj3gB-0006VE-2D; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:34:21 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jj3g9-0004HB-NG; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:34:17 +0100 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:34:17 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin To: Calvin Johnson Cc: Andrew Lunn , Heiner Kallweit , Jeremy Linton , Florian Fainelli , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 6/9] net: phy: add support for probing MMDs >= 8 for devices-in-package Message-ID: <20200610163417.GR1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> References: <20200527103318.GK1551@shell.armlinux.org.uk> <20200610161633.GA22223@lsv03152.swis.in-blr01.nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200610161633.GA22223@lsv03152.swis.in-blr01.nxp.com> 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 Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 09:46:33PM +0530, Calvin Johnson wrote: > Hi Russell, > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 11:34:11AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > Add support for probing MMDs above 7 for a valid devices-in-package > > specifier, but only probe the vendor MMDs for this if they also report > > that there the device is present in status register 2. This avoids > > issues where the MMD is implemented, but does not provide IEEE 802.3 > > compliant registers (such as the MV88X3310 PHY.) > > While this patch looks good to me, commit message doesn't seem to align > with the code changes as it is dealing with MMD at addresses 30 & 31. > Can you please clarify? IEEE 802.3 does not define the "device-is-present" two bits in register 8 for all MMDs - it is only present for MMDs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 30 and 31. None of the other MMDs, even those that have been recently defined (at least in IEEE 802.3-2018) have these bits. Hence, we can't use them except on the MMDs where they are defined to be present. I considered also checking them in MMDs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, but decided that the risk of regression was too high for this patch; that's something which could be added in a separate patch though, to avoid having to revert the entire thing if a regression is found at a later date. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC for 0.8m (est. 1762m) line in suburbia: sync at 13.1Mbps down 503kbps up