Hi Andrew. Thanks for your comments. I will update the patch a bit later.
> > Does 100Base-T1/cause 96 define a way to identify a PHY which > implements this? I'm just wondering if we can do this in the generic > code, for devices which correctly implement the standard? > Well, I did research IEEE 802.3 standards before implementing the Patch. Initially I wanted to update generic phy driver. I did not find a way to identify 100Base-T1 PHY using Clause 22 MDIO. This section is completely missing at IEEE 802.3bw, which describe 100Base-T1. There are some updates to Clause 45 registers at IEEE 802.3bw. They add "BASE-T1 PMA/PMD extended ability" to PMA/PMD registers. At Clause 96 they state following: "The MDIO capability described in Clause 45 defines several variables that provide control and status information for and about the PMA and PCS." In the same time I have played with a two different 100Base-T1 PHYs. Both use different Clause 22 registers to advertise their abilities, both are incompatible. None use Clause 45 for this purpose. It seems that this is going to be 100Base-T1 mess while IEEE 802.3bw miss Clause 22 updates. Clause 45 is rarely used from my experience. Probably IEEE expected 100Base-T1 PHYs to go for Clause 45 MDIO and this did not work so far. > > This is the second T1 driver we have had recently. It might make sense to add > a > PHY_T1_FEATURES macro the include/linux/phy.h > This seems reasonable, indeed. > > Don't you also want SUPPORTED_TP? > True, I will add SUPPORTED_TP in next revision of the Patch. Kirill
