From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
"Network Development" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
"Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"Russell King" <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
"Saravana Kannan" <saravanak@google.com>
Subject: Re: Race between "Generic PHY" and "bcm53xx" drivers after -EPROBE_DEFER
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 20:03:48 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210920170348.o7u66gpwnh7bczu2@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4648f65c-4d38-dbe9-a902-783e6dfb9cbd@gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 09:36:23AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> +Andrew, Vladimir, Heiner, Russell, Saravana,
>
> On 9/20/21 5:52 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> > I have problem using a switch b53 MDIO driver with an Ethernet bgmac
> > driver.
> >
> > bgmac registers MDIO bus before registering Ethernet controller. That
> > results in kernel probing switch (available as MDIO device) early which
> > results in dsa_port_parse_of() returning -EPROBE_DEFER.
>
> Yes, putting the big picture together and assuming you have applied
> these 3 patches which is how you observed that:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210920123441.9088-1-zajec5@gmail.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210920141024.1409-1-zajec5@gmail.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210920141024.1409-2-zajec5@gmail.com/
>
> This is somewhat expected unfortunately and I don't know how we can
> break the circular dependencies here.
Why is it expected? AFAIK:
(1) the Generic PHY driver will not match any hardware in phy_bus_match,
it is only bound by hand. Am I wrong?
(2) of_mdiobus_register sets "mdio->phy_mask = ~0;" anyway, which blocks
the automatic creation of any phy_device for stuff that responds to
PHY ID registers 2 and 3.
> > It's OK so far but then in goes like this:
> >
> > [ 1.306884] bus: 'bcma': driver_probe_device: matched device bcma0:5 with driver bgmac_bcma
> > [ 1.315427] bus: 'bcma': really_probe: probing driver bgmac_bcma with device bcma0:5
> > [ 1.323468] bgmac_bcma bcma0:5: Found PHY addr: 30 (NOREGS)
> > [ 1.329722] libphy: bcma_mdio mii bus: probed
> > [ 1.334468] bus: 'mdio_bus': driver_probe_device: matched device bcma_mdio-0-0:1e with driver bcm53xx
> > [ 1.343877] bus: 'mdio_bus': really_probe: probing driver bcm53xx with device bcma_mdio-0-0:1e
> > [ 1.353174] bcm53xx bcma_mdio-0-0:1e: found switch: BCM53125, rev 4
> > [ 1.359595] bcm53xx bcma_mdio-0-0:1e: failed to register switch: -517
> > [ 1.366212] mdio_bus bcma_mdio-0-0:1e: Driver bcm53xx requests probe deferral
> > [ 1.373499] mdio_bus bcma_mdio-0-0:1e: Added to deferred list
> > [ 1.379362] bgmac_bcma bcma0:5: Support for Roboswitch not implemented
> > [ 1.387067] bgmac_bcma bcma0:5: Timeout waiting for reg 0x1E0
> > [ 1.393600] driver: 'Generic PHY': driver_bound: bound to device 'bcma_mdio-0-0:1e'
> > [ 1.401390] Generic PHY bcma_mdio-0-0:1e: Removed from deferred list
> >
> > I can't drop "Generic PHY" driver as it's required for non-CPU switch
> > ports. I just need kernel to prefer b53 MDIO driver over the "Generic
> > PHY" one.
> >
> > Can someone help me fix that, please?
>
> I don't think that you have a race condition, but you have the Ethernet
> switch's pseudo PHY
what's a pseudo PHY?
> which is accessible via MDIO and the Generic PHY driver happily goes
> on trying to read the MII_PHYSID1/PHYS_ID2 which do not map to
> anything on that switch, but still you will get a non-zero/non-all Fs
> value from there, hence the Generic PHY is happy to take over.
Why would it do that? Why would there be a PHY device created for the
switch? Is there any phy-handle pointing to the switch OF node?
> Given that the MDIO node does have a compatible string which is not in
> the form of an Ethernet PHY's compatible string, I wonder if we can
> somewhat break the circular dependency using that information.
I think you're talking about:
of_mdiobus_register
-> of_mdiobus_child_is_phy
but as mentioned, that code path should not be creating PHY devices.
I think this code path in bgmac_probe might be responsible for it:
switch (core->core_unit) {
case 0:
bgmac->phyaddr = sprom->et0phyaddr;
break;
case 1:
bgmac->phyaddr = sprom->et1phyaddr;
break;
case 2:
bgmac->phyaddr = sprom->et2phyaddr;
break;
}
bgmac->phyaddr &= BGMAC_PHY_MASK;
if (bgmac->phyaddr == BGMAC_PHY_MASK) {
dev_err(bgmac->dev, "No PHY found\n");
err = -ENODEV;
goto err;
}
dev_info(bgmac->dev, "Found PHY addr: %d%s\n", bgmac->phyaddr,
bgmac->phyaddr == BGMAC_PHY_NOREGS ? " (NOREGS)" : "");
if (!bgmac_is_bcm4707_family(core) &&
!(ci->id == BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM53573 && core->core_unit == 1)) {
struct phy_device *phydev;
mii_bus = bcma_mdio_mii_register(bgmac);
if (IS_ERR(mii_bus)) {
err = PTR_ERR(mii_bus);
goto err;
}
bgmac->mii_bus = mii_bus;
phydev = mdiobus_get_phy(bgmac->mii_bus, bgmac->phyaddr);
if (ci->id == BCMA_CHIP_ID_BCM53573 && phydev &&
(phydev->drv->phy_id & phydev->drv->phy_id_mask) == PHY_ID_BCM54210E)
phydev->dev_flags |= PHY_BRCM_EN_MASTER_MODE;
}
At least, that's what the log indicates:
[ 1.323468] bgmac_bcma bcma0:5: Found PHY addr: 30 (NOREGS) <- 30 is 0x1e, which is Rafal's switch MDIO address in the device tree patch here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20210920141024.1409-1-zajec5@gmail.com/
So I haven't investigated what the code tries to do by searching the "sprom", but it probably shouldn't have a PHY address
pointing towards the switch?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-20 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-20 12:52 Race between "Generic PHY" and "bcm53xx" drivers after -EPROBE_DEFER Rafał Miłecki
2021-09-20 16:36 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-20 17:03 ` Vladimir Oltean [this message]
2021-09-20 17:14 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-20 17:40 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-09-20 17:46 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-20 18:02 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-09-20 18:10 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-20 18:17 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-09-20 18:25 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-20 18:36 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-09-21 9:45 ` Rafał Miłecki
2021-09-21 10:52 ` Rafał Miłecki
2021-09-20 18:58 ` Vladimir Oltean
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=20210920170348.o7u66gpwnh7bczu2@skbuf \
--to=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=saravanak@google.com \
--cc=zajec5@gmail.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