> My Micrel/Kendin KSZ8721BT on my ppc405EP board needs one us longer to > finish. I was able to reproduce this all the time. So I wonder if the > timeout of 100us is defined by the MII standard, or by the author of > the driver? > If it's a standard I've still a bad feeling if we just correct the > timeout to 100us, maybe 110 should be fine. If it's not defined by the > standard, I would add 50% to the timeout. It won't slow down other > phys, but a scan on the phy bus might get slowed down. > Same applies for __emac_mdio_write. > > Oh and we could save a us by putting the udelay(1) after the if section ;-)
Increasing the timeout is fine. In fact, EMAC specifically can sleep in it's MDIO access routines (it already takes mutexes) so maybe a good option here is to use longer sleeping delays and less iterations. Somebody knows off hand what the standard says the timeout should be ? I can check that tomorrow, I don't have it at hand right now and it's getting late but feel free to beat me to it :-) Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
