> Am 03.10.2019 um 14:13 schrieb Andrew Lunn <[email protected]>: > > On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 08:52:34AM +0000, Denis Odintsov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Thank you for your reply, now that you've said that I actually put >> WARN_ON(1) into mv88e6xxx_adjust_link and found out that it is not actually >> being called. Not even on 5.3. What I saw was a warning produced by block >> like "if (ds->ops->adjust_link)" in net/dsa/ code, but not the actual call. >> My bad. So it seems the content of the function is irrelevant, and as I can >> see there are many block like this, so most probably it is something one of >> these blocks were doing on 5.3 which changed to 5.4, which is way harder to >> debug I guess. Any other things I could check in that matter? >> >> Denis. > > Hi Danis > > Please don't top post. And wrap your emails to around 75 characters. > > How did you decide on 7fb5a711545d7d25fe9726a9ad277474dd83bd06? Did > you do a git bisect? > > Andrew
Hi, My approach after I've found the DSA no longer work properly on 5.3.0-rc1 that time was to compare dmesg of 5.2 and 5.3, where I did found the difference to be this line coming after DSA init: [ 2.812111] mv88e6085 f412a200.mdio-mii:04: Using legacy PHYLIB callbacks. Please migrate to PHYLINK! Present on 5.2 and info about phylink being there on 5.3. Looking into where it come from I've found it to be net/dsa/port.c in function dsa_port_link_register_of in case adjust_link defined. I've searched to what happened to adjust_link function in mv88e6xxx code between 5.2 and 5.3 and immediately hit 7fb5a711545d7d25fe9726a9ad277474dd83bd06. With that commit reverted everything worked fine again, so I assumed this is some part that is not yet fully done for mv88e6xxx or my 88E6141 specifically and is going to be done later, so I just used 5.3 with that patch reverted. PS. Sorry if I write something wrong, this is first time I communicate with kernel development so close, thank you for your patience. Denis
