Re: [regression] r8169 without realtek_phy

2018-08-17 Thread Heiner Kallweit
On 17.08.2018 19:39, Florian Fainelli wrote: > +Heiner, > > On 08/17/2018 01:33 AM, Jouni Mettälä wrote: >> There is network regression for me. 4.18 was good. 4.18+ is bad. There >> was some phy changes in r8169 driver. Fortunately adding >> CONFIG_REALTEK_PHY=m to kernel config fixed the regressi

Re: [regression] r8169 without realtek_phy

2018-08-17 Thread Florian Fainelli
+Heiner, On 08/17/2018 01:33 AM, Jouni Mettälä wrote: > There is network regression for me. 4.18 was good. 4.18+ is bad. There > was some phy changes in r8169 driver. Fortunately adding > CONFIG_REALTEK_PHY=m to kernel config fixed the regression. > > Should r8169 depend on realtek_phy? Does tha

[regression] r8169 without realtek_phy

2018-08-17 Thread Jouni Mettälä
There is network regression for me. 4.18 was good. 4.18+ is bad. There was some phy changes in r8169 driver. Fortunately adding CONFIG_REALTEK_PHY=m to kernel config fixed the regression. Should r8169 depend on realtek_phy? Does that breaks something else? Network doesn't work with Generic PHY (