Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 17 Apr 2020 16:32:39 +0200 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] ethtool: provide UAPI for PHY master/slave configuration. |
| |
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 11:11:45AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:57:39PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > index c8b0c34030d32..d5edf2bc40e43 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > > > @@ -604,6 +604,7 @@ struct phy_device *phy_device_create(struct mii_bus *bus, int addr, u32 phy_id, > > > dev->asym_pause = 0; > > > dev->link = 0; > > > dev->interface = PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_GMII; > > > + dev->master_slave = PORT_MODE_UNKNOWN; > > > > phydev->master_slave is how we want the PHY to be configured. I don't > > think PORT_MODE_UNKNOWN makes any sense in that contest. 802.3 gives > > some defaults. 9.12 should be 0, meaning manual master/slave > > configuration is disabled. The majority of linux devices are end > > systems. So we should default to a single point device. So i would > > initialise PORT_MODE_SLAVE, or whatever we end up calling that. > > I'm not sure that is a good idea given that we use phylib to drive > the built-in PHYs in DSA switches, which ought to prefer master mode > via the "is a multiport device" bit.
O.K. So i assume you mean we should read from the PHY at probe time what it is doing, in order to initialise dev->master_slave?
I would be happy with that.
Andrew
| |