Re: [PATCH net-next v4 1/2] net: dsa: microchip: ksz8: Make flow control, speed, and duplex on CPU port configurable

Oleksij Rempel
2023-05-21T04:38:56Z

On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 06:17:08PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Sat, May 20, 2023 at 07:03:17AM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 11:34:49PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 08:50:15PM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > > Thank you for your feedback. I see your point.
> > > >
> > > > We need to remember that the KSZ switch series has different types of
> > > > ports. Specifically, for the KSZ8 series, there's a unique port. This
> > > > port is unique because it's the only one that can be configured with
> > > > global registers, and it is only one supports tail tagging. This special
> > > > port is already referenced in the driver by "dev->cpu_port", so I continued
> > > > using it in my patch.
> > >
> > > Ok, I understand, so for the KSZ8 family, the assumption about which
> > > port will use tail tagging is baked into the hardware.
> > >
> > > > It is important to note that while this port has an xMII interface, it
> > > > is not the only port that could have an xMII interface. Therefore, using
> > > > "dev->info->internal_phy" may not be the best way to identify this port,
> > > > because there can be ports that are not global/cpu, have an xMII
> > > > interface, but don't have an internal PHY.
> > >
> > > Right, but since we're talking about phylink, the goal is to identify
> > > the xMII ports, not the CPU ports... This is a particularly denatured
> > > case because the xMII port is global and is also the CPU port.
> >
> > I see. Do you have any suggestions for a better or more suitable
> > implementation? I'm open to ideas.
>
> Trying to answer here for both questions. In the RFC/RFT patch set I had
> posted, I introduced the concept of "wacky" registers, which are registers
> which should be per port (and are accessed as per-port by the driver),
> but because there is a single such port in the switch, the hardware
> design degenerated into moving them in the global area. Nonetheless,
> treating the xMII global registers as per-port makes it possible for the
> common driver to share more code between KSZ8 and others.
>
> If you look at ksz9477_phylink_mac_link_up() - renamed to just
> ksz_phylink_mac_link_up() in my patch set - hard enough, you can see
> that it makes an attempt to generalize the "link up" procedure for all
> switch families, via these regs and fields. At the end of that regfield
> series, I theoretically converted KSZ8765/KSZ8794/KSZ8795 to reuse
> ksz9477_phylink_mac_link_up(). Theoretically because no one commented
> on whether the result still worked.
>
> I think that regfields and that KSZ_WACKY_REG_FIELD_8() are an avenue
> worth exploring here.
>

Looks good, I like the idea with "wacky" registers!

Would you prefer that I start working on adapting your patch set to the
KSZ8873? Or should I make a review to move forward the existing patch set?

Just a heads up, I don't have access to the KSZ87xx series switches, so
I won't be able to test the changes on these models.

Let me know what you think and how we should proceed.

Regards,
Oleksij
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |