On 5/18/19 4:14 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 01:51:23AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> Add driver for the NXP TJA1100 and TJA1101 PHYs. These PHYs are special
>> BroadRReach 100BaseT1 PHYs used in automotive.
>
> Hi Marek
Hello Andrew,
>> + }, {
>> + PHY_ID_MATCH_MODEL(PHY_ID_TJA1101),
>> + .name = "NXP TJA1101",
>> + .features = PHY_BASIC_T1_FEATURES,
>
> One thing i would like to do before this patch goes in is define
> ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_100baseT1_Full_BIT in ethtool.h, and use it here.
> We could not do it earlier because were ran out of bits. But with
> PHYLIB now using bitmaps, rather than u32, we can.
>
> Once net-next reopens i will submit a patch adding it.
I can understand blocking patches from being applied if they have review
problems or need to be updated on some existing or even posted feature.
But blocking a patch because some future yet-to-be-developed patch is a
bit odd.
Besides, this sounds more like a cleanup which can very well be done
later. It will surely be done for the other PHY drivers too.
> I also see in the data sheet we should be able to correct detect its
> features using register 15. So we should extend
> genphy_read_abilities().
Which bits do you refer to ?
Anyway, this is something which can be done in a subsequent patch, I
don't see a reason for blocking hardware enablement because of this.
> That will allow us to avoid changing
> PHY_BASIC_T1_FEATURES and possibly breaking backwards compatibility of
> other T1 PHY which currently say they are plain 100BaseT.
What sort of backward compatibility ?
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
