On Mon, Mar 04, 2019 at 03:07:24PM +0000, Jose Abreu wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On 3/1/2019 1:53 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 11:54:24AM +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> >> +static inline int phy_update_link(struct phy_device *phydev)
> >> +{
> >> + if (!phydev->drv)
> >> + return -EIO;
> >> +
> >> + if (phydev->drv->read_status)
> >> + return phydev->drv->read_status(phydev);
> >> + else if (phydev->is_c45)
> >> + return gen10g_read_status(phydev);
> >> + else
> >> + return genphy_update_link(phydev);
> >> +}
> >
> > Hi Jose
> >
> > The asymmetry here could be an issue. We might fall into the trap
> > that a c45 PHY has the full state in phydev updated, were as a c22
> > only has the link updated. Somebody testing on C45 might miss a bug
> > for a C22 device.
>
> Notice that this phy_update_link() is called from PHY_FORCING
> state which in my case happens when autoneg is not enabled / is
> not supported.
>
> I think it makes sense, in this case, to only update link status,
> no ?
Hi Jose
It is actually quite difficult to determine when the link is up. I
personally would not trust gen10g_read_status() to get this right, and
would always implement the read_status callback.
Which PHY driver are you using, which does not support
read_status(). All the mainline PHY drivers do seem to have
read_status implemented.
Andrew
