On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 05:57:58PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Wednesday 30 December 2020 16:13:10 Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 04:47:54PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Some GPON SFP modules (e.g. Ubiquiti U-Fiber Instant) have set both > > > SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED and SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL bits in their EEPROM. > > > > > > Such combination of bits is meaningless so assume that LOS signal is not > > > implemented. > > > > > > This patch fixes link carrier for GPON SFP module Ubiquiti U-Fiber > > > Instant. > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> > > > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@armlinux.org.uk> > > > > No, this is not co-developed. The patch content is exactly what _I_ > > sent you, only the commit description is your own. > > Sorry, in this case I misunderstood usage of this Co-developed-by tag. > I will remove it in next iteration of patches.
You need to mark me as the author of the code at the very least... > > > Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <p...@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > drivers/net/phy/sfp.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > > > index 73f3ecf15260..d47485ed239c 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c > > > @@ -1475,15 +1475,19 @@ static void sfp_sm_link_down(struct sfp *sfp) > > > > > > static void sfp_sm_link_check_los(struct sfp *sfp) > > > { > > > - unsigned int los = sfp->state & SFP_F_LOS; > > > + const __be16 los_inverted = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED); > > > + const __be16 los_normal = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL); > > > + __be16 los_options = sfp->id.ext.options & (los_inverted | los_normal); > > > + bool los = false; > > > > > > /* If neither SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED nor SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL > > > - * are set, we assume that no LOS signal is available. > > > + * are set, we assume that no LOS signal is available. If both are > > > + * set, we assume LOS is not implemented (and is meaningless.) > > > */ > > > - if (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED)) > > > - los ^= SFP_F_LOS; > > > - else if (!(sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL))) > > > - los = 0; > > > + if (los_options == los_inverted) > > > + los = !(sfp->state & SFP_F_LOS); > > > + else if (los_options == los_normal) > > > + los = !!(sfp->state & SFP_F_LOS); > > > > > > if (los) > > > sfp_sm_next(sfp, SFP_S_WAIT_LOS, 0); > > > @@ -1493,18 +1497,22 @@ static void sfp_sm_link_check_los(struct sfp *sfp) > > > > > > static bool sfp_los_event_active(struct sfp *sfp, unsigned int event) > > > { > > > - return (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED) && > > > - event == SFP_E_LOS_LOW) || > > > - (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL) && > > > - event == SFP_E_LOS_HIGH); > > > + const __be16 los_inverted = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED); > > > + const __be16 los_normal = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL); > > > + __be16 los_options = sfp->id.ext.options & (los_inverted | los_normal); > > > + > > > + return (los_options == los_inverted && event == SFP_E_LOS_LOW) || > > > + (los_options == los_normal && event == SFP_E_LOS_HIGH); > > > } > > > > > > static bool sfp_los_event_inactive(struct sfp *sfp, unsigned int event) > > > { > > > - return (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED) && > > > - event == SFP_E_LOS_HIGH) || > > > - (sfp->id.ext.options & cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL) && > > > - event == SFP_E_LOS_LOW); > > > + const __be16 los_inverted = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_INVERTED); > > > + const __be16 los_normal = cpu_to_be16(SFP_OPTIONS_LOS_NORMAL); > > > + __be16 los_options = sfp->id.ext.options & (los_inverted | los_normal); > > > + > > > + return (los_options == los_inverted && event == SFP_E_LOS_HIGH) || > > > + (los_options == los_normal && event == SFP_E_LOS_LOW); > > > } > > > > > > static void sfp_sm_fault(struct sfp *sfp, unsigned int next_state, bool > > > warn) > > > -- > > > 2.20.1 > > > > > > > > > > -- > > RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ > > FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last! > -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!