On 9/28/20 3:03 PM, Richard Leitner wrote: > On Sat, Sep 26, 2020 at 08:52:17PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: >> On 9/9/20 10:38 AM, Richard Leitner wrote: >>> 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> >> >> So can this fix be applied ? > > In case this question was aimed at me: >>From my side there are no objections.
Thanks. It would be nice if this bugfix was applied upstream soon.
