From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To: Nicolai Buchwitz <nb@tipi-net.de>
Cc: 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>,
Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: phy: add support for disabling autonomous EEE
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2026 15:17:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a1cf8f6a-b338-4dd7-aced-7e19e4d0fdb7@lunn.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260406-devel-autonomous-eee-v1-0-b335e7143711@tipi-net.de>
On Mon, Apr 06, 2026 at 09:13:06AM +0200, Nicolai Buchwitz wrote:
> Some PHYs implement autonomous EEE where the PHY manages EEE
> independently
I suppose we should discuss naming. As far as i know, IEEE 802.3 does
not include this feature, so it does not provide a guide to how we
should name it.
In the past we have used SmartEEE, but that is Atheros's vendor
name. Broadcom seem to call it AutoGrEEEn.
Autonomous EEE seems like a reasonable name, and appears to be vendor
agnostic. Are we happy with this?
What i guess is unclear is what part of the network stack is acting
autonomously. In the context of a PHY driver op,
.disable_autonomous_eee is clear. But when we go further to actually
making use of it, do we need to report to user space if we are using
IEEE 802.3 EEE or "autonomous EEE". But i guess it is no worse than
SmartEEE or AutoGrEEEn which also make no indication where EEE is
happening.
Thoughts?
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-06 13:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-06 7:13 [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: phy: add support for disabling autonomous EEE Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 7:13 ` [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: phy: add support for disabling PHY-autonomous EEE Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 7:13 ` [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: phy: broadcom: implement .disable_autonomous_eee for BCM54xx Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 16:54 ` Florian Fainelli
2026-04-06 7:13 ` [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: phy: realtek: convert RTL8211F to .disable_autonomous_eee Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 13:17 ` Andrew Lunn [this message]
2026-04-06 13:33 ` [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: phy: add support for disabling autonomous EEE Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 13:56 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-04-06 16:43 ` Florian Fainelli
2026-04-06 17:10 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2026-04-06 18:29 ` Nicolai Buchwitz
2026-04-06 19:24 ` Andrew Lunn
2026-04-06 20:28 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2026-04-12 18:35 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-12 19:40 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=a1cf8f6a-b338-4dd7-aced-7e19e4d0fdb7@lunn.ch \
--to=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=nb@tipi-net.de \
--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