Hi Vladimir, On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 8:48 PM Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Jean, > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 07:58:01PM +0100, Jean Pihet wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 7:41 PM Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 09:34:08AM +0100, Jean Pihet wrote: > > > > Add support for RGMII in 100 and 1000 Mbps. > > > > > > > > Adjust the CPU port settings from the host interface settings: interface > > > > MII type, speed, duplex. > > > > > > Hi Jean > > > > > > You have still not explained why this is needed. Why? is always the > > > important question to answer in the commit message. The What? is > > > obvious from reading the patch. Why does you board need this, when no > > > over board does? > > > > I reworked the commit description about the What and thought it was > > enough. Do you need a cover letter to describe it more? > > > > The Why is: > > " > > Configure the host port of the switch to match the host interface > > settings. This is useful when the switch is directly connected to the > > host MAC interface. > > " > > Thank you for reviewing the patch. > > First of all, I am not clear if you want the patch merged or not. If you > do, then I don't understand why you did not use the > ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl > tool to get the email addresses of the people who can help you with > that. No one from Microchip, not the DSA maintainers, not the networking > maintainer. My bad, I thought that sending to both LKML and netdev was enough.
> > Secondly, don't you get an annoying warning that you should not use > .adjust_link and should migrate to .phylink_mac_link_up? Why do you > ignore it? Did you even see it? No there is no warning using my arm config, both with linux and netdev kernels. > > Thirdly, your patch is opaque and has three changes folded into one. You > refactor some code from ksz8795_port_setup into a separate function, you > add logic for the speeds of 100 and 10 for RGMII, and you call this > function from .adjust_link. You must justify why you need all of this, > and cannot just add 3 lines to ksz8795_port_setup. You must explain that > the ksz8795_port_setup function does not use information from device > tree. Then you must explain why the patch is correct. > The code refactored out of ksz8795_port_setup, plus the changes you've > added to it, looks now super weird. Half of ksz8795_mii_config treats > p->phydev.speed as an output variable, and half of it as an input > variable. To the untrained eye this looks like a hack. I'm sure you can > clarify. This is what Andrew wants to see. Ok taking notes here, thanks for the valuable input. > > Fourth, seriously now, could you just copy Microchip people to your > patches? The phylink conversion was done this summer, I'm sure they can > help with some suggestions. Ok will do, and check the phylink conversion code. Thank you for reviewing. BR, Jean
