On 06.06.2019 20:36, Andrew Lunn wrote: > 65;5402;1c> I don't like too much state changes outside control of the state > machine, >> like in phy_start / phy_stop / phy_error. I think it would be better >> if a state change request is sent to the state machine, and the state >> machine decides whether the requested transition is allowed. > > Hi Heiner > > I initially though that phy_error() would be a good way to do what > Russell wants. But the locks get in the way. Maybe add an unlocked > version which PHY drivers can use to indicate something fatal has > happened? > phy_error() switches to PHY_HALTED, therefore phy_start() would start another attempt to bring up the PHY. Maybe some new state like PHY_PERMANENT_FAILURE could be helpful. Or do we need a temporary failure state?
After a recent patch from Russell the probe callback returns -ENODEV if no firmware is loaded. With the patch starting this discussion this would have changed to not failing in probe but preventing the PHY from coming up. The commit message missed an explanation what we gain with this behavior change. > Andrew > Heiner
