Sorry - I was sick and out of office.
The phy_id reads 0x01410cc1. 

Regards,

Gokul.
On 26/09/18, 9:05 PM, "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" <danie...@cisco.com> wrote:

    On 09/25/2018 10:42 PM, Harini Katakam wrote:
    > Hi,
    > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:00 PM Harini Katakam <hari...@xilinx.com> 
wrote:
    >>
    >> Hi Daniel,
    >>
    >> On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 9:10 PM Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I hope this this thread isn't too old to bring back to life. So it 
seems
    >>>> that Harini found that m88e1111 did not need this errata, and Cisco
    >>>> previously found that Harini's patch fixed m88e1112, we included it
    >>>> internally for that reason
    >>>>
    >>>> Now I'm getting reports that this errata fixes issues we're seeing on
    >>>> m88e1111. We see an interrupt storm without the errata, despite the 
errata
    >>>> not being defined in the datasheet.
    >>>
    >>> Is everybody actually using interrupts? It could be in one system
    >>> phylib is polling.
    >>>
    >>
    >> Yes, we weren't using interrupts; we used phy poll.
    >>
    >> As I recall, the register and page combination was reserved and
    >> the access seemed to fail.
    >> It will be useful if we can the errata description or version details.
    >> I'll check if I can get any more information.
    > 
    > One of the PHY parts used was "88E1111-B2-bab1i000"
    
    I doubt I can find this level of detail .. We have many of these 
    machines in the field so they may have different part numbers.
    
    I may have been given some incorrect details on the issue. I'm not 
    currently sure this errata code is related. I'll let you know when I 
    have more information.
    
    Daniel
    

Reply via email to