Hi Florian,
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 7:20 PM Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/10/2021 7:17 PM, Ilya Lipnitskiy wrote:
> > Hi Vladimir,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 3:10 PM Vladimir Oltean <olte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hello Ilya,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 01:14:20PM -0800, Ilya Lipnitskiy wrote:
> >>> 3f9ef7785a9c ("MIPS: ralink: manage low reset lines") made it so mt7530
> >>> actually resets the switch on platforms such as mt7621 (where bit 2 is
> >>> the reset line for the switch). That exposed an issue where the switch
> >>> would not function properly in TRGMII mode after a reset.
> >>>
> >>> Reconfigure core clock in TRGMII mode to fix the issue.
> >>>
> >>> Also, disable both core and TRGMII Tx clocks prior to reconfiguring.
> >>> Previously, only the core clock was disabled, but not TRGMII Tx clock.
> >>>
> >>> Tested on Ubiquity ER-X (MT7621) with TRGMII mode enabled.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ilya Lipnitskiy <ilya.lipnits...@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>
> >> For the networking subsystem there are two git trees, "net" for bugfixes
> >> and "net-next" for new features, and we specify the target tree using
> >> git send-email --subject-prefix="PATCH net-next".
> >>
> >> I assume you would like the v5.12 kernel to actually be functional on
> >> the Ubiquiti ER-X switch, so I would recommend keeping this patch
> >> minimal and splitting it out from the current series, and targeting it
> >> towards the "net" tree, which will eventually get merged into one of the
> >> v5.12 rc's and then into the final version. The other patches won't go
> >> into v5.12 but into v5.13, hence the "next" name.
> > I thought I figured it out - now I'm confused. Can you explain why
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210311012108.7190-1-ilya.lipnits...@gmail.com/
> > is marked as supeseded?
>
> That looks like a mistake on the maintainer side, I do not believe that
> patch should be Superseded since you just submitted it.
Thanks for taking a look. I thought maybe I did something wrong with
submitting the same patch to net and net-next, but the net-next series
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210311020954.842341-1-ilya.lipnits...@gmail.com/)
depends on it, so the way I did it made the most sense for me. Let me
know if I did something wrong.
> --
> Florian
