Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 27 Apr 2019 10:44:01 +0300 | From | Serge Semin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] net: phy: realtek: Add rtl8211e rx/tx delays config |
| |
On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 08:11:50PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > On 4/26/2019 4:45 PM, Serge Semin wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 11:40:50PM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 12:21:11AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote: > >>> There are two chip pins named TXDLY and RXDLY which actually adds the 2ns > >>> delays to TXC and RXC for TXD/RXD latching. Alas this is the only > >>> documented info regarding the RGMII timing control configurations the PHY > >>> provides. It turns out the same settings can be setup via MDIO registers > >>> hidden in the extension pages layout. Particularly the extension page 0xa4 > >>> provides a register 0x1c, which bits 1 and 2 control the described delays. > >>> They are used to implement the "rgmii-{id,rxid,txid}" phy-mode. > >>> > >>> The hidden RGMII configs register utilization was found in the rtl8211e > >>> U-boot driver: > >>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/u-boot/v2019.01/source/drivers/net/phy/realtek.c#L99 > >>> > >>> There is also a freebsd-folks discussion regarding this register: > >>> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D13591 > >>> > >>> It confirms that the register bits field must control the so called > >>> configuration pins described in the table 12-13 of the official PHY > >>> datasheet: > >>> 8:6 = PHY Address > >>> 5:4 = Auto-Negotiation > >>> 3 = Interface Mode Select > >>> 2 = RX Delay > >>> 1 = TX Delay > >>> 0 = SELRGV > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com> > >> > >> > >> Hi Serge > >> > >> Next time please include a patch 0 containing a cover note explaining > >> the who series. > >> > > > > Sure as long as the patchset gets to be much bigger than two small > > patches with an obvious reason to be merged. > > netdev likes to have a cover letter for patch count >= 1, probably > something to be added to netdev-FAQ.rst. > -- > Florian
Hello Florian Really, even with count = 1? So just one patch with cover-letter? Doesn't it seem redundant since at least a single patch can be thoroughly described in it' commit message?
-Sergey
| |