Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Jan 2018 16:53:11 +0100 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/4] net: mvpp2: 2500baseX support |
| |
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 04:32:27PM +0100, Antoine Tenart wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 04:20:36PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > > @@ -4612,6 +4616,9 @@ static int mvpp22_comphy_init(struct mvpp2_port *port) > > > case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_1000BASEX: > > > mode = PHY_MODE_SGMII; > > > break; > > > + case PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500BASEX: > > > + mode = PHY_MODE_2500SGMII; > > > + break; > > > > I think this is the source of confusion with linux/phy.h and > > linux/phy/phy.h. > > > > What would PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500SGMII use? > > > > Where is this all getting confused? Should the caller to > > mvpp22_comphy_init() actually be passing PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500SGMII? > > What is the MAC actually doing at this point? 2500BASEX or 2500SGMII? > > PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500BASEX is the PHY mode whereas PHY_MODE_2500SGMII > is the mode used by the common PHY driver (i.e. the one configuring the > serdes lanes).
> There's no PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500SGMII mode.
Hi Antoine
At the moment there is no PHY_INTERFACE_MODE_2500SGMII. However, there are some devices which can do 2.5G SGMII. So it will appear sometime. This piece of code then looks even stranger.
> Sure, I can add a comment to state this function is a translation > between the net PHY mode and the generic PHY mode (it's a n-to-1 > translation).
I think from an API design point of view, passing PHY_MODE_2500BASEX to comphy makes more sense. That is what the MAC wants to do. How the comphy achieves that should be internal to the comphy.
Andrew
| |