From: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
To: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
Cc: andrew@lunn.ch, hkallweit1@gmail.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: phy: micrel: Add support for lan8842
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 12:48:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aIC944gcYkfFsIRD@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250723090145.o2kq4vxcjrih54rt@DEN-DL-M31836.microchip.com>
On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 11:01:45AM +0200, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> The 07/23/2025 07:34, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> >
> > Hi Horatiu,
>
> Hi Olekij,
>
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 09:14:05AM +0200, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> >
> > > +static int lan8842_config_init(struct phy_device *phydev)
> > > +{
> > > + int val;
> > > + int ret;
> > > +
> > > + /* Reset the PHY */
> > > + val = lanphy_read_page_reg(phydev, 4, LAN8814_QSGMII_SOFT_RESET);
> >
> > It would be good to use defines for MMD pages.
>
> Those are extended pages and not MMD pages. Currently in the entire
> source code I can see we used hardcoded values, also in the register
> description it looks like all these extended pages do not have really
> meaningfull names: Extended Page 0, Extended Page 4, Extended Page 5...
I'll be happy with xxxx_EXT_PAGE_0, etc
> > > + val = lanphy_read_page_reg(phydev, 0, LAN8842_FLF);
> > > + if (val < 0)
> > > + return val;
> > > + val |= LAN8842_FLF_ENA | LAN8842_FLF_ENA_LINK_DOWN;
> >
> > If I see it correctly, FLF support will make link fail after ~1ms, while
> > IEEE 802.3 recommends 750ms. Since a link recovery of a PHY with autoneg
> > support usually takes multiple seconds, I see the benefit for FLF
> > support only mostly for SyncE environment at same time it seems to be
> > a disadvantage for other environments.
>
> Why would be a disadvantage?
The disadvantage in a standard network without a backup link (like one
using RSTP) comes from how the system handles recoverable, temporary
errors like a short burst of noise.
# Standard PHY Behavior (Grace Period)
When a standard 1000BASE-T link becomes unstable, the IEEE 802.3
standard requires the PHY to attempt to retrain and recover the
connection on its own. It has a timeout window of up to 750 ms to do
this, which acts as a grace period.
If the link issue was temporary and the PHY recovers within this window,
the operating system never sees a "link down" event. Applications only
experience a brief moment of packet loss, which is often handled
gracefully by protocols like TCP.
# FLF Behavior (Immediate Failure)
An FLF-enabled PHY is designed to report link instability almost
immediately (~1 ms). Instead of trying to recover silently, it
immediately reports a hard link failure to the operating system.
# The Disadvantage in a Single-Link System
For a system with only one link, this "fail-fast" approach can be a
disadvantage. Consider a short, recoverable noise burst:
- Without FLF: The PHY uses its 750 ms grace period to recover. The
link stays up, and the service interruption is limited to brief packet
loss.
- With FLF: The PHY reports "link down" after ~1 ms. The operating
system tears down the network interface. Even if the hardware recovers
quickly, the OS has to bring the interface back up, re-run DHCP, and
re-establish all application connections. This system-level recovery
often takes much longer than the original glitch.
In short, FLF can turn a minor, recoverable physical-layer glitch into a
more disruptive, longer-lasting outage at the application level when
there is no backup link to switch to.
--
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 |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-23 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-21 7:14 [PATCH net-next] net: phy: micrel: Add support for lan8842 Horatiu Vultur
2025-07-21 14:22 ` Andrew Lunn
2025-07-22 6:09 ` Horatiu Vultur
2025-07-22 13:08 ` Andrew Lunn
2025-07-23 5:34 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-07-23 9:01 ` Horatiu Vultur
2025-07-23 10:48 ` Oleksij Rempel [this message]
2025-07-23 14:28 ` Andrew Lunn
2025-07-24 6:25 ` Horatiu Vultur
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=aIC944gcYkfFsIRD@pengutronix.de \
--to=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=horatiu.vultur@microchip.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