From: Marco von Rosenberg <marcovr@selfnet.de>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Marco von Rosenberg <marcovr@selfnet.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: broadcom: Wire suspend/resume for BCM54612E
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2023 02:47:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4890615.31r3eYUQgx@5cd116mnfx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fe3ad92f-31d9-4509-b851-017218229e19@lunn.ch>
On Wednesday, November 1, 2023 11:06:56 PM CET Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 01, 2023 at 10:42:52PM +0100, Marco von Rosenberg wrote:
> > On Tuesday, October 31, 2023 1:31:11 AM CET Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > Are we talking about a device which as been suspended? The PHY has
> > > been left running because there is no suspend callback? Something then
> > > triggers a resume. The bootloader then suspends the active PHY? Linux
> > > then boots, detects its a resume, so does not touch the hardware
> > > because there is no resume callback? The suspended PHY is then
> > > useless.
> >
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > thanks for your feedback. I guess a bit of context is missing here. The
> > issue has nothing to do with an ordinary suspension of the OS. The main
> > point is that on initial power-up, the bootloader suspends the PHY before
> > booting Linux. With a resume callback defined, Linux would call it on
> > boot and make the PHY usable.
>
> Ah, so you rely on phy_attach_direct() calling phy_resume(phydev).
>
> This seems an odd way to solve the problem. It was not Linux which
> suspend the PHY, so using resume is asymmetric.
>
> I think soft_reset() or config_init() should be taking the PHY out of
> suspend.
I agree with all of your points. This is just one way which happens to solve
this specific problem. Of course it might be asymmetric to see the patch as
a solution to my problem. However is there anything fundamentally wrong with
adding suspend/resume callbacks? I see some other drivers having these
callbacks defined and some not (it seems a bit inconsistent throughout the
drivers in broadcom.c to be honest).
I'm wondering if I should just omit this whole "motivation" paragraph in the
commit message and just use the commit message of commit 38b6a9073007 ("net:
phy: broadcom: Wire suspend/resume for BCM50610 and BCM50610M") as a template.
I mean, regardless of my motivation, I would say it makes sense for this PHY
to support suspend and resume.
Marco
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-03 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-30 22:54 [PATCH] net: phy: broadcom: Wire suspend/resume for BCM54612E Marco von Rosenberg
2023-10-31 0:31 ` Andrew Lunn
2023-11-01 21:42 ` Marco von Rosenberg
2023-11-01 22:06 ` Andrew Lunn
2023-11-03 1:47 ` Marco von Rosenberg [this message]
2023-11-03 3:39 ` Florian Fainelli
2023-11-03 17:37 ` Marco von Rosenberg
2023-11-03 12:13 ` Andrew Lunn
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=4890615.31r3eYUQgx@5cd116mnfx \
--to=marcovr@selfnet.de \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=florian.fainelli@broadcom.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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