On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 09:23:26PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 9/4/20 9:02 PM, Richard Leitner wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 05:26:14PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > >> On 9/4/20 4:02 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 12:45:44AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>>> On 9/4/20 12:08 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > >>>>>>> b4 am 20200903043947.3272453-1-f.faine...@gmail.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That might be a fix for the long run, but I doubt there's any chance to > >>>>>> backport it all to stable, is there ? > >>>>> > >>>>> No. For stable we need something simpler. > >>>> > >>>> Like this patch ? > >>> > >>> Yes. > >>> > >>> But i would like to see a Tested-By: or similar from Richard > >>> Leitner. Why does the current code work for his system? Does your > >>> change break it? > >> > >> I have the IRQ line connected and described in DT. The reset clears the > >> IRQ settings done by the SMSC PHY driver. The PHY works fine if I use > >> polling, because then even if no IRQs are generated by the PHY, the PHY > >> framework reads the status updates from the PHY periodically and the > >> default settings of the PHY somehow work (even if they are slightly > >> incorrect). I suspect that's how Richard had it working. > > > > I have different PHYs on different PCBs in use, but IIRC none of them > > has the IRQ line defined in the DT. > > I will take a look at it, test your patch and give feedback ASAP. > > Unfortunately it's unlikely that this will be before monday 😕 > > Hope that's ok. > > That's totally fine, thanks !
Hi, sorry for the delay. I've applied the patch to our kernel and did some basic tests on different custom imx6 PCBs. As everything seems to work fine for our "non-irq configuration" please feel free to add Tested-by: Richard Leitner <richard.leit...@skidata.com> regards;rl
