Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 6 Feb 2023 16:42:57 +0100 | From | Andrew Lunn <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v4 02/23] net: phy: add genphy_c45_read_eee_abilities() function |
| |
On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 01:22:46PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 11:49:55AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > Why stop at 10GBase-KR? Register 3.20 defines EEE abilities up to 100G > > > (for speeds >10G, there seem to be 2 modes, "deep sleep" or "fast wake", > > > with "deep sleep" being essentially equivalent to the only mode > > > available for <=10G modes). > > > > Hm, > > > > If i take only deep sleep, missing modes are: > > 3.20.13 100GBASE-R deep sleep > > family of Physical Layer devices using 100GBASE-R encoding: > > 100000baseCR4_Full > > 100000baseKR4_Full > > 100000baseCR10_Full (missing) > > 100000baseSR4_Full > > 100000baseSR10_Full (missing) > > 100000baseLR4_ER4_Full > > > > 3.20.11 25GBASE-R deep sleep > > family of Physical Layer devices using 25GBASE-R encoding: > > 25000baseCR_Full > > 25000baseER_Full (missing) > > 25000baseKR_Full > > 25000baseLR_Full (missing) > > 25000baseSR_Full > > > > 3.20.9 40GBASE-R deep sleep > > family of Physical Layer devices using 40GBASE-R encoding: > > 40000baseKR4_Full > > 40000baseCR4_Full > > 40000baseSR4_Full > > 40000baseLR4_Full > > > > 3.20.7 40GBASE-T > > 40000baseT_Full (missing) > > > > I have no experience with modes > 1Gbit. Do all of them correct? What > > should we do with missing modes? Or may be it make sense to implement > > > 10G modes separately? > > Given the fact that UAPI needs an extension to cover supported/advertisement > bits > 31, I think it makes sense to add these separately. I had not > realized this when I commented on this patch. I don't think we want the > kernel to advertise EEE for some link modes without user space seeing it.
We also don't currently support any PHYs which do more than 10G. So i don't see any need for 40GB and above at the moment.
Andrew
| |