lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/3] netlink: add master/slave configuration support
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:54:13PM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> This UAPI is needed for BroadR-Reach 100BASE-T1 devices. Due to lack of
> auto-negotiation support, we needed to be able to configure the
> MASTER-SLAVE role of the port manually or from an application in user
> space.
>
> The same UAPI can be used for 1000BASE-T or MultiGBASE-T devices to
> force MASTER or SLAVE role. See IEEE 802.3-2018:
> 22.2.4.3.7 MASTER-SLAVE control register (Register 9)
> 22.2.4.3.8 MASTER-SLAVE status register (Register 10)
> 40.5.2 MASTER-SLAVE configuration resolution
> 45.2.1.185.1 MASTER-SLAVE config value (1.2100.14)
> 45.2.7.10 MultiGBASE-T AN control 1 register (Register 7.32)
>
> The MASTER-SLAVE role affects the clock configuration:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> When the PHY is configured as MASTER, the PMA Transmit function shall
> source TX_TCLK from a local clock source. When configured as SLAVE, the
> PMA Transmit function shall source TX_TCLK from the clock recovered from
> data stream provided by MASTER.
>
> iMX6Q KSZ9031 XXX
> ------\ /-----------\ /------------\
> | | | | |
> MAC |<----RGMII----->| PHY Slave |<------>| PHY Master |
> |<--- 125 MHz ---+-<------/ | | \ |
> ------/ \-----------/ \------------/
> ^
> \-TX_TCLK
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Since some clock or link related issues are only reproducible in a
> specific MASTER-SLAVE-role, MAC and PHY configuration, it is beneficial
> to provide generic (not 100BASE-T1 specific) interface to the user space
> for configuration flexibility and trouble shooting.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
> ---

The patch looks good from technical point of view but I don't like the
inconsistency of user interface:

1. Similar to what we discussed earlier on kernel side, you use "Port
mode" in "ethtool <dev>" output but the corresponding command line
argument for "ethtool -s <dev> ..." is "master-slave". Even if it's
documented, it's rather confusing for users.

2. The values for "master-slave" parameter are "master-preferred" and
"master-force" (and the same for "slave"). Please use the same form for
both, i.e. either "prefer / force" or "preferred / forced". Also, it
would be friendlier to users to make the values consistent with
"ethtool <dev>" output, e.g. if it says "preferred Master", setting
should use something as close as possible, i.e. "preferred-master".

Michal
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-07 22:40    [W:0.058 / U:1.908 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site